Discussion about 09/11/2001: [911InsideJobbers] Digest Number 397

Friday, February 24, 2006

[911InsideJobbers] Digest Number 397

There are 25 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. [Fwd: RE: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]]
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
2. [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
3. Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]
From: "perpetualynquisitive" <perpetualynquisitive@yahoo.com>
4. Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
5. Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]
From: "Bill Giltner" <bill.giltner@gmail.com>
6. Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]
From: "Bill Giltner" <bill.giltner@gmail.com>
7. Re: Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
8. Re:02/20 NYC
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
9. Re: Re:02/20 NYC
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
10. 911 Myths and Dr Greening's Report
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
11. UAE -DPW- Ports deal: Bush had DPW ties!
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>
12. new anti-CD roach at DU
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>
13. [Fwd: Final comment/ Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Pentalawn presentation]]
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
14. Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation
From: "Lynn Ertell" <lynnertell@comcast.net>
15. [Fwd: [catapult] 9-11 to be subject of George Noory show tonite.]
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
16. Gordon J. Ross and Hypersonic Flexwings
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
17. Re: new anti-CD roach at DU
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
18. Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]
From: "perpetualynquisitive" <perpetualynquisitive@yahoo.com>
19. [Fwd: [ctrl] ALERT: cited sources-Dubai's NYC Grand Central Station purchase]
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
20. Re:02/20 NYC
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
21. Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
22. Different CNN audio dub 2nd hit?
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>
23. Re: Different CNN audio dub 2nd hit?
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
24. Re: Troll batlle of the century
From: "Bill Giltner" <bill.giltner@gmail.com>
25. Re: Different CNN audio dub 2nd hit?
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 07:54:30 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: [Fwd: RE: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta
lawn presentation]
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:50:21 +1100
From: Gerard Holmgren <holmgren@iinet.net.au>
To: 'Rosalee Grable' <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>,
<devvyk@earthlink.net>, 'Killtown' <killtown@yahoo.com>

Devvy,

can you please tell us what's "respectful" about spreading bullshit about
plane crashes which never happened ? For whoever did die that day (and we
don't really know who or how many ) the truth should be told.

Also, do you realize how truly distasteful your remarks are to those who
have managed to survive the genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan, which was
launched as the result of this bullshit story ? Hundreds of thousands,
killed , maimed, traumatized and disposed - and it looks like we've only
seen the beginning of it.

Yet meanwhile you cover up for the lies of the war criminals by spreading
bullshit about non existent planes - all for the sake of supposed respect
for a few Americans - some of whom may not even have died anyway.

You think a few Americans are worth more than a few hundred thousand
raggyheads? Is that your attitude ?

If not, then think more fully through the disgraceful racism inherinet in
your message.

There were no such flights as AA11 or 77 that day.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/1177.html

Independent of that proof,

Media Published Fake Passenger lists for American Airlines flight 11.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/fake.html

You think it's "respectful" to publish fake passenger lists ?

UA 93 and 175 almost certainly did not crash as they were registered as
valid on the FAA aircraft registry for more than four years afterwards.

Go to the FAA aircraft registry

http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm

and do an "n number" search for N591UA ( UA 93 on Sept 11) and N612UA (UA
175 on Sept 11).

I find your attitude offensive, disrespectful and racist.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rosalee Grable [mailto:webfairy@thewebfairy.com]
Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2006 6:23 PM
To: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com; devvyk@earthlink.net; Gerard Holmgren;
Killtown
Subject: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn
presentation]

I would never have guessed that Devvy Kidd would come on like a word I'd
have to moderate myself for.

People were affected by Empty Hole 93 so we should pretend the hole
wasn't empty for their sake?
What a twisty rotgut form of logic~~
I don't think it's the least bit funny that they created a 15 foot
smoldering hole and tried to pretend a plane crashed in it.
The Mayor, one of the first people on the scene didn't see any sign of
any plane.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor1.htm
He did see FEMA guys there prematurely tho.
flash video:
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor.htm

A Reporter says there is nothing but a ten foot gash.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/hole.htm

I had a friend visit there too.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/crimescene.htm
She says it's on the grounds of a secret base.

The Pentalawn page is a good natured factual accounting.
It has been picked up by
http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=8022

I would have thought better of Devvy Kidd. How disappointing that this
person thinks that humorless porkies are respectful, but a careful
accounting of common sense fact isn't?
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
leads to a whole section that carefully documents this crime.
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html
This is an intensely respectful memorial, but what it respects is truth.

What is this world coming to that lying about how people died is
supposed to be a form of respect?

It seems to me that those people's lives would be vindicated by the real
facts coming out.
THEY DIDN"T USE PLANES.
They used lies.
It is a good clue why this world is going down the tubes when somebody
with the previously fine reputation of Devvy Kidd starts advocating
lying as a form of politeness.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Your Penta lawn presentation
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:40:55 -0800
From: devvyk@earthlink.net

To: webfairy@thewebfairy.com

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html

I don't know who to address this mail to, but I found your link off
Rense.com tonight.

Your Penta Lawn presentation is in very poor taste. I am fully aware of
the fairy tale told by the criminals who run our government, but people
died in the Pentagon that day. Decent Americans who were guilty of
nothing more than going to work.

Your sarcastic portrayal degrades and makes fun of a horrible, horrible
event and the cover up.

I believe you would be better served to show some respect for those who
died that day. Can you imagine a father, son, wife, husband, son or
daughter who happens on this page and sees this mockery of that day? Can
you take a moment to think about how they would feel seeing how you are
making fun of something so horrible?

To me, this is as tasteless as the web site that boasts "Find the
airplane" re Flight 93. I was in PA last summer and I can tell you, this
crash deeply affected the people who live in the surrounding area and
that web site that makes fun of "Find the Plane" "Let's Roll" It has
hurt a lof of those decent folks - people who had nothing to do with
Bush's policy making or anything else.

If you want to be taken seriously, please change your presentation to
something professional and respectful of our dead fellow Americans while
getting your scientific point to the reader.

Devvy Kidd

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 07:55:38 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Wing and tail stress limits
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:02:20 +1100
From: Gerard Holmgren <holmgren@iinet.net.au>

The next time planehuggers talk about wings chopping down steel support
columns while still attached to a fuselage which is being turned into an
accordion...

For a plane to be allowed to be allowed to fly, aircraft engineers
submit the plane's wings to load limit tests. The required strength is
1.5 times the " maximum loads likely to experienced by the aircraft
during normal service."

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=3
<http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=3>

"The airframer has been running load trials on a full scale A380 static
test specimen in Toulouse since late 2004 (pictured below). *After
completing "limit load" tests (ie the maximum loads likely to
experienced by the aircraft during normal service), progressively
greater loads have been applied to the specimen towards the required 1.5
times the limit load.* Engineers develop finite element models (FEM) to
calculate the load requirements.

"The failure occurred last Tuesday between 1.45 and 1.5 times the limit
load at a point between the inboard and outboard engines," says Airbus
executive vice president engineering Alain Garcia. "This is within 3% of
the 1.5 target, which shows the accuracy of the FEM." *He adds that the
ultimate load trial is an "extremely severe test during which a wing
deflection of 7.4m (24.3ft) was recorded". "...*The European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) says that the maximum loading conditions are
defined in the A380 certification basis. "The aircraft structure is
analysed and tested to demonstrate that the structure can withstand the
maximum loads, including a factor of safety of 1.5. This process is
ongoing and will be completed before type certification."

* *

*Some videos of test crashes and actual crashes. Some don't clearly show
what happens to the structure of the plane but those which do are the
C130,the "hard landing" -- actually both of these were landings which
were successful but just too hard -- in one the tail falls off, in the
other wings snap off, when they touch the ground. I wasn't able to see
the Saab, because I don't have quick time.*

* *

*http://www.alexisparkinn.com/aviation_videos.htm#TEST%20FLIGHTS*

* *

*And how about the tail, which although now (somehow still ) connected a
fuselage which no longer existed, still managed to smash its way through
the building, even though the plane would have almost stopped by now.*

* *

*Remember Flight 587 ? The tail just fell off it.*

* *

*Here is the official explanation. Of course, we all know that 587 is
extremely suspicious, but if we are dealing with people who don't
believe in Govt conspiracies at all, this puts them in the awkward
position of having to either eject the official story of 587 (and
therefore propose a cons;piracy) or else admit it as a valid comparison, *

* *

*http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathweb/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=11
<http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathweb/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=11>
*

* *

The data recovered from American Airlines Flight 587 showed that the
plane hit turbulence from a plane in front of it and seconds later,
began to swing violently and *break* up before it fell 2,900 feet to the
ground, killing 265 people. The vertical *tail* of the plane, and the
rudder attached to it, were the first parts to *break* off, and
investigators began to look early on at whether that caused the crash,
possibly because of some undetected flaw.

But now, after extensive testing of the *tail*, they have found no
pre-existing problem. And so they are intensely exploring whether the
pilots, in trying to correct and control the plane after the turbulence,
might have put more stress on the *tail* than it was designed to handle.

"A brand-new *tail* would have broken," said one investigator,
underlining his belief that the effort by the pilots to control the
plane set in motion the fatal series of events. Another investigator
involved in the National Transportation Safety Board's inquiry pointed
out that it is possible to take an airplane in perfect condition and
maneuver it into a breakup, just as a driver could take a sport-utility
vehicle in perfect condition and make a radical maneuver at high speed
that results in a rollover or other accident.

The plane that crashed, an Airbus A300, is a long airplane - 177.5 feet
- and with the fuselage acting like a long lever, sudden movements from
side to side produce powerful pressures at the end, where the vertical
*tail* sits. By international regulation, the *tail* is supposed to be
able to withstand a force 50 percent stronger than the largest it is
likely to ever encounter, and Airbus officials said that the A300 *tail*
exceeded even that standard. But investigators now believe that the
*tail* was overstressed.

Once again the international regulations give a 50 % headroom over
normal flying stresses at the point at which it acceptable for a tail to
break. And yet we had a tail attached to a destroyed fuselage, smashing
itself through a wall. Same at the pentagon.

* *

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:37:26 -0000
From: "perpetualynquisitive" <perpetualynquisitive@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]

Are you trying to say that airliner wings can't slice through steel
columns like a Ginsu® knife through ripe tomatoes?

Behold the strength of airliner wings here
<http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=planedamagedbybird097large1qx.jpg> and here
<http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=planedamagedbybird0984bq.jpg>

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <webfairy@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Wing and tail stress limits
> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:02:20 +1100
> From: Gerard Holmgren holmgren@...
>
>
>
> The next time planehuggers talk about wings chopping down steel
support
> columns while still attached to a fuselage which is being turned into
an
> accordion...
>
>
>
> For a plane to be allowed to be allowed to fly, aircraft engineers
> submit the plane's wings to load limit tests. The required strength is
> 1.5 times the " maximum loads likely to experienced by the aircraft
> during normal service."
>
>
>
>http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=3
><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=3>
>
>
>
>
> "The airframer has been running load trials on a full scale A380
static
> test specimen in Toulouse since late 2004 (pictured below). *After
> completing "limit load" tests (ie the maximum loads likely to
> experienced by the aircraft during normal service), progressively
> greater loads have been applied to the specimen towards the required
1.5
> times the limit load.* Engineers develop finite element models (FEM)
to
> calculate the load requirements.
>
> "The failure occurred last Tuesday between 1.45 and 1.5 times the
limit
> load at a point between the inboard and outboard engines," says Airbus
> executive vice president engineering Alain Garcia. "This is within 3%
of
> the 1.5 target, which shows the accuracy of the FEM." *He adds that
the
> ultimate load trial is an "extremely severe test during which a wing
> deflection of 7.4m (24.3ft) was recorded". "...*The European Aviation
> Safety Agency (EASA) says that the maximum loading conditions are
> defined in the A380 certification basis. "The aircraft structure is
> analysed and tested to demonstrate that the structure can withstand
the
> maximum loads, including a factor of safety of 1.5. This process is
> ongoing and will be completed before type certification."
>
> * *
>
> *Some videos of test crashes and actual crashes. Some don't clearly
show
> what happens to the structure of the plane but those which do are the
> C130,the "hard landing" -- actually both of these were landings which
> were successful but just too hard -- in one the tail falls off, in the
> other wings snap off, when they touch the ground. I wasn't able to see
> the Saab, because I don't have quick time.*
>
> * *
>
> *http://www.alexisparkinn.com/aviation_videos.htm#TEST%20FLIGHTS*
>
> * *
>
> *And how about the tail, which although now (somehow still ) connected
a
> fuselage which no longer existed, still managed to smash its way
through
> the building, even though the plane would have almost stopped by now.*
>
> * *
>
> *Remember Flight 587 ? The tail just fell off it.*
>
> * *
>
> *Here is the official explanation. Of course, we all know that 587 is
> extremely suspicious, but if we are dealing with people who don't
> believe in Govt conspiracies at all, this puts them in the awkward
> position of having to either eject the official story of 587 (and
> therefore propose a cons;piracy) or else admit it as a valid
comparison, *
>
> * *
>
>*http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathweb/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=11
><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathweb/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=11>
> *
>
> * *
>
> The data recovered from American Airlines Flight 587 showed that the
> plane hit turbulence from a plane in front of it and seconds later,
> began to swing violently and *break* up before it fell 2,900 feet to
the
> ground, killing 265 people. The vertical *tail* of the plane, and the
> rudder attached to it, were the first parts to *break* off, and
> investigators began to look early on at whether that caused the crash,
> possibly because of some undetected flaw.
>
> But now, after extensive testing of the *tail*, they have found no
> pre-existing problem. And so they are intensely exploring whether the
> pilots, in trying to correct and control the plane after the
turbulence,
> might have put more stress on the *tail* than it was designed to
handle.
>
> "A brand-new *tail* would have broken," said one investigator,
> underlining his belief that the effort by the pilots to control the
> plane set in motion the fatal series of events. Another investigator
> involved in the National Transportation Safety Board's inquiry pointed
> out that it is possible to take an airplane in perfect condition and
> maneuver it into a breakup, just as a driver could take a
sport-utility
> vehicle in perfect condition and make a radical maneuver at high speed
> that results in a rollover or other accident.
>
> The plane that crashed, an Airbus A300, is a long airplane - 177.5
feet
> - and with the fuselage acting like a long lever, sudden movements
from
> side to side produce powerful pressures at the end, where the vertical
> *tail* sits. By international regulation, the *tail* is supposed to be
> able to withstand a force 50 percent stronger than the largest it is
> likely to ever encounter, and Airbus officials said that the A300
*tail*
> exceeded even that standard. But investigators now believe that the
> *tail* was overstressed.
>
> Once again the international regulations give a 50 % headroom over
> normal flying stresses at the point at which it acceptable for a tail
to
> break. And yet we had a tail attached to a destroyed fuselage,
smashing
> itself through a wall. Same at the pentagon.
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> * *
>

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:39:19 -0000
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]

But but but-- they were EXPLOSIVE birds!

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "perpetualynquisitive"
<perpetualynquisitive@...> wrote:
>
> Are you trying to say that airliner wings can't slice through steel
> columns like a Ginsuï¿½ knife through ripe tomatoes?
>
> Behold the strength of airliner wings here
>
<http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=planedamagedbybird097large1qx.j> pg> and here
> <http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=planedamagedbybird0984bq.jpg>
>
>
>
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <webfairy@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Wing and tail stress limits
> > Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:02:20 +1100
> > From: Gerard Holmgren holmgren@
> >
> >
> >
> > The next time planehuggers talk about wings chopping down steel
> support
> > columns while still attached to a fuselage which is being turned into
> an
> > accordion...
> >
> >
> >
> > For a plane to be allowed to be allowed to fly, aircraft engineers
> > submit the plane's wings to load limit tests. The required strength is
> > 1.5 times the " maximum loads likely to experienced by the aircraft
> > during normal service."
> >
> >
> >
>
>http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/f>
ocus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&c> d=3
>
><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/>
focus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&> cd=3>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "The airframer has been running load trials on a full scale A380
> static
> > test specimen in Toulouse since late 2004 (pictured below). *After
> > completing "limit load" tests (ie the maximum loads likely to
> > experienced by the aircraft during normal service), progressively
> > greater loads have been applied to the specimen towards the required
> 1.5
> > times the limit load.* Engineers develop finite element models (FEM)
> to
> > calculate the load requirements.
> >
> > "The failure occurred last Tuesday between 1.45 and 1.5 times the
> limit
> > load at a point between the inboard and outboard engines," says Airbus
> > executive vice president engineering Alain Garcia. "This is within 3%
> of
> > the 1.5 target, which shows the accuracy of the FEM." *He adds that
> the
> > ultimate load trial is an "extremely severe test during which a wing
> > deflection of 7.4m (24.3ft) was recorded". "...*The European Aviation
> > Safety Agency (EASA) says that the maximum loading conditions are
> > defined in the A380 certification basis. "The aircraft structure is
> > analysed and tested to demonstrate that the structure can withstand
> the
> > maximum loads, including a factor of safety of 1.5. This process is
> > ongoing and will be completed before type certification."
> >
> > * *
> >
> > *Some videos of test crashes and actual crashes. Some don't clearly
> show
> > what happens to the structure of the plane but those which do are the
> > C130,the "hard landing" -- actually both of these were landings which
> > were successful but just too hard -- in one the tail falls off, in the
> > other wings snap off, when they touch the ground. I wasn't able to see
> > the Saab, because I don't have quick time.*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > *http://www.alexisparkinn.com/aviation_videos.htm#TEST%20FLIGHTS*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > *And how about the tail, which although now (somehow still ) connected
> a
> > fuselage which no longer existed, still managed to smash its way
> through
> > the building, even though the plane would have almost stopped by now.*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > *Remember Flight 587 ? The tail just fell off it.*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > *Here is the official explanation. Of course, we all know that 587 is
> > extremely suspicious, but if we are dealing with people who don't
> > believe in Govt conspiracies at all, this puts them in the awkward
> > position of having to either eject the official story of 587 (and
> > therefore propose a cons;piracy) or else admit it as a valid
> comparison, *
> >
> > * *
> >
>
>*http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathwe>
b/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct> =clnk&cd=11
>
><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathwe>
b/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct> =clnk&cd=11>
> > *
> >
> > * *
> >
> > The data recovered from American Airlines Flight 587 showed that the
> > plane hit turbulence from a plane in front of it and seconds later,
> > began to swing violently and *break* up before it fell 2,900 feet to
> the
> > ground, killing 265 people. The vertical *tail* of the plane, and the
> > rudder attached to it, were the first parts to *break* off, and
> > investigators began to look early on at whether that caused the crash,
> > possibly because of some undetected flaw.
> >
> > But now, after extensive testing of the *tail*, they have found no
> > pre-existing problem. And so they are intensely exploring whether the
> > pilots, in trying to correct and control the plane after the
> turbulence,
> > might have put more stress on the *tail* than it was designed to
> handle.
> >
> > "A brand-new *tail* would have broken," said one investigator,
> > underlining his belief that the effort by the pilots to control the
> > plane set in motion the fatal series of events. Another investigator
> > involved in the National Transportation Safety Board's inquiry pointed
> > out that it is possible to take an airplane in perfect condition and
> > maneuver it into a breakup, just as a driver could take a
> sport-utility
> > vehicle in perfect condition and make a radical maneuver at high speed
> > that results in a rollover or other accident.
> >
> > The plane that crashed, an Airbus A300, is a long airplane - 177.5
> feet
> > - and with the fuselage acting like a long lever, sudden movements
> from
> > side to side produce powerful pressures at the end, where the vertical
> > *tail* sits. By international regulation, the *tail* is supposed to be
> > able to withstand a force 50 percent stronger than the largest it is
> > likely to ever encounter, and Airbus officials said that the A300
> *tail*
> > exceeded even that standard. But investigators now believe that the
> > *tail* was overstressed.
> >
> > Once again the international regulations give a 50 % headroom over
> > normal flying stresses at the point at which it acceptable for a tail
> to
> > break. And yet we had a tail attached to a destroyed fuselage,
> smashing
> > itself through a wall. Same at the pentagon.
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:01:48 -0000
From: "Bill Giltner" <bill.giltner@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]

Wow. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

News, even disappointing news, can be very useful to helping us all
see who seems to be capable of standing up for justice.
Alternatviely it shows who, for whatever reason, has lost their way,
or is furtively opposed to justice.

The hardest thing for me personally, being an atheist, is to know
what to do with all the "activists" who put a Christian spin on any
of the 9/11 truth movement. There seems to be such a huge number of
people from David Icke to Bill Deagle to Alex Jones (I'm sure this
is a tiny mention) that want to make this a God v. Devil issue. If
I'm remembering correctly, Devvy Kidd comes from a Christian
prospective. I just can't go there.

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable
<webfairy@...> wrote:
>
> I would never have guessed that Devvy Kidd would come on like a
word I'd
> have to moderate myself for.
>
> People were affected by Empty Hole 93 so we should pretend the
hole
> wasn't empty for their sake?
> What a twisty rotgut form of logic~~
> I don't think it's the least bit funny that they created a 15 foot
> smoldering hole and tried to pretend a plane crashed in it.
> The Mayor, one of the first people on the scene didn't see any
sign of
> any plane.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor1.htm
> He did see FEMA guys there prematurely tho.
> flash video:
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor.htm
>
> A Reporter says there is nothing but a ten foot gash.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/hole.htm
>
> I had a friend visit there too.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/crimescene.htm
> She says it's on the grounds of a secret base.
>
>
> The Pentalawn page is a good natured factual accounting.
> It has been picked up by
> http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=8022
>
>
> I would have thought better of Devvy Kidd. How disappointing that
this
> person thinks that humorless porkies are respectful, but a careful
> accounting of common sense fact isn't?
> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
> leads to a whole section that carefully documents this crime.
> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html
> This is an intensely respectful memorial, but what it respects is
truth.
>
> What is this world coming to that lying about how people died is
> supposed to be a form of respect?
>
> It seems to me that those people's lives would be vindicated by
the real
> facts coming out.
> THEY DIDN"T USE PLANES.
> They used lies.
> It is a good clue why this world is going down the tubes when
somebody
> with the previously fine reputation of Devvy Kidd starts
advocating
> lying as a form of politeness.
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Your Penta lawn presentation
> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:40:55 -0800
> From: devvyk@...
>
> To: webfairy@...
>
>
>
> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
>
> I don't know who to address this mail to, but I found your link
off
> Rense.com tonight.
>
> Your Penta Lawn presentation is in very poor taste. I am fully
aware of
> the fairy tale told by the criminals who run our government, but
people
> died in the Pentagon that day. Decent Americans who were guilty of
> nothing more than going to work.
>
> Your sarcastic portrayal degrades and makes fun of a horrible,
horrible
> event and the cover up.
>
> I believe you would be better served to show some respect for
those who
> died that day. Can you imagine a father, son, wife, husband, son
or
> daughter who happens on this page and sees this mockery of that
day? Can
> you take a moment to think about how they would feel seeing how
you are
> making fun of something so horrible?
>
> To me, this is as tasteless as the web site that boasts "Find the
> airplane" re Flight 93. I was in PA last summer and I can tell
you, this
> crash deeply affected the people who live in the surrounding area
and
> that web site that makes fun of "Find the Plane" "Let's Roll" It
has
> hurt a lof of those decent folks - people who had nothing to do
with
> Bush's policy making or anything else.
>
> If you want to be taken seriously, please change your presentation
to
> something professional and respectful of our dead fellow Americans
while
> getting your scientific point to the reader.
>
> Devvy Kidd
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:19:36 -0000
From: "Bill Giltner" <bill.giltner@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]

I just went to newswithviews.com to reivew Ms. Kidd's postings.
From what I can see, she hasn't even dealt with 9/11 since Sept.
2005, and this is the article she wrote:

http://newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd125.htm

There can be no doubt she is "not helpful" (a phrase Rumsfeld loves
to say). Is it possible that many, many of the left gatekeepers and
people like Ms. Kidd are just comfortable with the status quo of
their place in the world, and think the upheaval of people knowing
the truth will upset their little lives? Is there some other
explanation?

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:44:57 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]

Hopefully she will respond to the taunts now.
BATR has reinterated a previous offer for her to join the group.
That would make an interesting forum, since Lisa Guliani is there too.
Fingers crossed.

This is one of her pictures, from two weeks after.
Notice the grass has been all covered up, just like they did at the
pentagon.
http://www.devvy.com/photos/Flight93/orig_david_hess_one.jpg
http://www.devvy.com/photos/Flight93/orig_david_hess_one.jpg

Whatever created the Empty Hole with No Plane In IT
had a radiation that affected cameras just like happened at all the
other crimescenes.

http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/emptyhole.htm

and seems to have blighted trees, according to this picture she says
comes from the FBI
Notice the blight pattern has a purple cast and is circular.
http://www.devvy.com/photos/Flight93/orig_fbi_flight_93.jpg
http://www.devvy.com/photos/Flight93/orig_fbi_flight_93.jpg

Bill Giltner wrote:
> I just went to newswithviews.com to reivew Ms. Kidd's postings.
> >From what I can see, she hasn't even dealt with 9/11 since Sept.
> 2005, and this is the article she wrote:
>
> http://newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd125.htm
>
> There can be no doubt she is "not helpful" (a phrase Rumsfeld loves
> to say). Is it possible that many, many of the left gatekeepers and
> people like Ms. Kidd are just comfortable with the status quo of
> their place in the world, and think the upheaval of people knowing
> the truth will upset their little lives? Is there some other
> explanation?
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable
> <webfairy@...> wrote:
>
>> I would never have guessed that Devvy Kidd would come on like a
>>
> word I'd
>
>> have to moderate myself for.
>>
>> People were affected by Empty Hole 93 so we should pretend the
>>
> hole
>
>> wasn't empty for their sake?
>> What a twisty rotgut form of logic~~
>> I don't think it's the least bit funny that they created a 15 foot
>> smoldering hole and tried to pretend a plane crashed in it.
>> The Mayor, one of the first people on the scene didn't see any
>>
> sign of
>
>> any plane.
>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor1.htm
>> He did see FEMA guys there prematurely tho.
>> flash video:
>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor.htm
>>
>> A Reporter says there is nothing but a ten foot gash.
>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/hole.htm
>>
>> I had a friend visit there too.
>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/crimescene.htm
>> She says it's on the grounds of a secret base.
>>
>>
>> The Pentalawn page is a good natured factual accounting.
>> It has been picked up by
>> http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=8022
>>
>>
>> I would have thought better of Devvy Kidd. How disappointing that
>>
> this
>
>> person thinks that humorless porkies are respectful, but a careful
>> accounting of common sense fact isn't?
>> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
>> leads to a whole section that carefully documents this crime.
>> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html
>> This is an intensely respectful memorial, but what it respects is
>>
> truth.
>
>> What is this world coming to that lying about how people died is
>> supposed to be a form of respect?
>>
>> It seems to me that those people's lives would be vindicated by
>>
> the real
>
>> facts coming out.
>> THEY DIDN"T USE PLANES.
>> They used lies.
>> It is a good clue why this world is going down the tubes when
>>
> somebody
>
>> with the previously fine reputation of Devvy Kidd starts
>>
> advocating
>
>> lying as a form of politeness.
>>
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Your Penta lawn presentation
>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:40:55 -0800
>> From: devvyk@...
>>
>> To: webfairy@...
>>
>>
>>
>> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
>>
>> I don't know who to address this mail to, but I found your link
>>
> off
>
>> Rense.com tonight.
>>
>> Your Penta Lawn presentation is in very poor taste. I am fully
>>
> aware of
>
>> the fairy tale told by the criminals who run our government, but
>>
> people
>
>> died in the Pentagon that day. Decent Americans who were guilty of
>> nothing more than going to work.
>>
>> Your sarcastic portrayal degrades and makes fun of a horrible,
>>
> horrible
>
>> event and the cover up.
>>
>> I believe you would be better served to show some respect for
>>
> those who
>
>> died that day. Can you imagine a father, son, wife, husband, son
>>
> or
>
>> daughter who happens on this page and sees this mockery of that
>>
> day? Can
>
>> you take a moment to think about how they would feel seeing how
>>
> you are
>
>> making fun of something so horrible?
>>
>> To me, this is as tasteless as the web site that boasts "Find the
>> airplane" re Flight 93. I was in PA last summer and I can tell
>>
> you, this
>
>> crash deeply affected the people who live in the surrounding area
>>
> and
>
>> that web site that makes fun of "Find the Plane" "Let's Roll" It
>>
> has
>
>> hurt a lof of those decent folks - people who had nothing to do
>>
> with
>
>> Bush's policy making or anything else.
>>
>> If you want to be taken seriously, please change your presentation
>>
> to
>
>> something professional and respectful of our dead fellow Americans
>>
> while
>
>> getting your scientific point to the reader.
>>
>> Devvy Kidd
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 16:03:51 -0000
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re:02/20 NYC

Rosalee, with all due respect, could you explain or show more clearly how
you know that it is a flock of drones in the naudet video? This explanation
simply is not very clear to me and I supect to a lot of people as well.

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <webfairy@...>
wrote:
>
> http://missilegate.com
>
> [[I unable to see the
> swarm of UAV's in the air?]]
>
> Do you see anything in the air?
> Do you see something moving?
> That's the swarm of drones flying in a close formation.
> They split up once they reach the corner of the building.
> At this point one seems to split off and stay on the roof while at least two
others come down the face of the building. Later we see the third building
dustpimples higher up on the building. There is also a white shiny triangular
one that is persistant off to the side on both hits seen as a white triangle
shape. I expect this is the control center for zapping the drones around like a
video game with real effects..
>
> Most of these objects are around car size.
> You can't see something carsize clearly from that distance, especially since
there seems to be some sort of electronic pulse going on that makes things
fuzzy until after the explosion.
>
> Look at the big picture of the flashframe on
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
>
> there is another showing which has disrupted the pattern of the flash in the
lower righthand section of the flash.
> Can you sorta see it?
>
> Thank you for questions I need to answer for my missilegate site.
>
> Jimmy Walters wrote me back, disappointed that it's all pictures and no
words.
>
> It all seems so obvious that I can never figure out what to say.
> I am suprised what little skill paople have at observation.
> They can only see words programmed on their bellyscreens.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> malaprop wrote:
> > "Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
> > less.
> > It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
> > what
> > you would do if you was a perp."
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure if some Maalox all around isn't called for, but I know
> > that putting one'self in the perp's shoes is one of the oldest methods
> > of working on a crime. Sort of a reverse engineering.
> >
> > On the subject at hand, you say the existance of these drones has even
> > be bragged about.......and while I can see 3 puffs on contact--which
> > could correspond to the 2 engines, nose--why am I unable to see the
> > swarm of UAV's in the air?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@...>
> > To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
> >
> >
> > Idjuts from the Frameup on Humanity are blind.
> > Even blinder than your average schnookiedupe who isn't much at
> > observation either, but when it comes to brainwashed perps, they see
> > STRICTLY what they are told to see. Things make no impression on their
> > eyes. They live inside their own imagination.
> >
> > IF you don't believe I am blind and stupid as it's really you being,
> > knock yourself out of this dreamland where you think everything has to
> > be "rational' as in pre-thought and predigested.
> > You are making me think that you are a "Jesuit Adjudicator" --since it
> > was your comment that (choke choke) the vatican is not perps -- that
> > got
> > Captain May a high temperature roasting.
> >
> > Again, ALL perplings of what every faction are going to unite on the
> > FICTION that the first hit is animation. You might as well show your
> > face now.
> >
> > The missilegate frames are authentic and they show REAL CIA-style
> > drones
> > running in a pack and creating gray clouds of aerosolized thermite
> > explosions. The existance of these drones has been bragged about
> > even.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/uav
> >
> > I hate to pull an "expert" card, but I am an unparralled and unrivaled
> > expert in the study of the first hit footage. Yes, it can be and has
> > been faked.
> > Marcus Icke has extremely sophisticated techniques for turning the
> > drones and explosives into a "plane" to suit his own diabolical need
> > to
> > keep the ball in the air.
> > But at least he documented his techniques carefully, so we have a
> > clear
> > record of how images could be faked if they were.
> >
> > I can do hyper-enlargements of Marcus faked planes and see how they
> > stack up to the work known real.
> > heh!!
> >
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
> > has one of marcus's so called "enhancements" that he palmed off on
> > SPINEless which were really only fanciful artwork.
> >
> > Marcus always concentrated on just a couple frames. He could never
> > reanimate his work.
> > My missilegate frames
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
> > reanimate perfectly which is their Purity Seal that they haven't been
> > mucked with in any way foul.
> >
> > I've seen the pattern -- people cling to their (proudly) ininformed
> > opinion and act like the results of my four years careful analysis
> > means
> > less than their digestion.
> >
> > Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
> > less.
> > It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
> > what
> > you would do if you was a perp.
> >
> > The only thing changed about the missilegate frames is a few frames
> > were
> > nipped out from the thing-in-the-air and the things-in-front-of-the
> > building because the continuity from one frame to the next is broken,
> > but it is always the same formation of objects with subtle
> > differences,
> > no cookiecutter mode but different complex angles that could not be
> > modeled in.
> >
> >
> >
> > malaprop wrote:
> >
> >> No, of course I don't think your blind or stupid.
> >>
> >> But my mind has a mind of it's own, and insists on going trapesing
> >> from time to time, poking here and there. Right now it is
> >> juggling
> >> with them having a backup copy--just in case the real one revealed
> >> more than they wanted--finding it non-threatening decided on the
> >> real
> >> clip. But I think they had the ability to animate everything
> >> except
> >> the CD.
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@...>
> >> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 5:38 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
> >>
> >>
> >> I have been studying this footage close up and personal for four
> >> years
> >> and better now....
> >>
> >> Do you really think that I am so blind and stupid as to not be able
> >> to
> >> pick up IN FOUR YEARS OF CLOSE STUDY if the first hit imagery was
> >> fake?
> >>
> >> The implicent insult to my intelligence, character and motivation
> >> tucked
> >> inside this particular craphead lie has managed to set off my anger
> >> repeatedly and alienate friends.
> >> I think I have learned my lesson now and will remain calm even tho I
> >> percieve your tubby idea is more insulting than the insult I
> >> moderated
> >> somebody for.
> >>
> >> I have known I need to put words to the Missilegate, and I wrote the
> >> words during a similarly distasteful session with Peter Meyer and
> >> Lynn
> >> which isn't posted anywhere yet, but does need to be posted as
> >> commentary to the missilegate frames.
> >>
> >> These are real, authentic, WAY WAY too detailed images to have
> >> originated as any form of animation or cartoon....
> >> http:://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig/beautyshots
> >> compare with the enlargements of the "tailfin" on the Pentagon Art
> >> Frames.
> >> http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/multiframes.htm
> >> click any of the titles above the sets of pictures to be wisked away
> >> to
> >> commentary which links to enlargements of most sets of art frames.
> >>
> >> The Beautyshots are infinitely detailed.
> >> These are artistically enhanced enlargements at least 10,000 times
> >> enlarged and they still show subtle character.
> >> In the art frames, even a 300 percent enlargement of the "tailfin"
> >> equals flat characterless monocolor.
> >>
> >> No animation technique could do that.
> >> It took months or years to produce a version of the Pentagon Art
> >> Frames
> >> which could be animated for video.
> >>
> >> In the Missilegate Frames, The complex and peculiar nature of the
> >> images
> >> remains complex and peculiar no matter how they are dealt.
> >> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
> >> All the cartoons show a "plane" pushed along kind of like a rubber
> >> stamp.
> >> Not here:
> >> http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/beautyshots
> >>
> >> Since it bothers me so bad, All the Anti_Webfairy types are going
> >> band
> >> together to pass off that those aren't really a flock of top secret
> >> drones, but a cartoon, just to keep the lies in play.
> >>
> >> It is real. It is a real snuff film.
> >> http:..911foreknowledge.com
> >> at most they have snipped out a few frames because there are
> >> continuity
> >> lapses.
> >> Whatever is there is set out to brag -- as the perps laugh cos you
> >> can
> >> wave this stuff in front of their face and you'd rather call me an
> >> incompetent liar than face that last straw that favors "rationality"
> >> over reason.
> >>
> >> If one thing is a cartoon, then everything is a cartoon is a very
> >> primitive logic pattern for which I have no respect. It's the sort
> >> of
> >> slimeballing I'd expect from Break For News.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> malaprop wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Yes, I am, as this is where I am at. With it being so risk-free to
> >>> use
> >>> pre-packaged video, why would they use the Naudet film of the
> >>> impact?
> >>> Taking it apart, it looks like the opening could have been shot on
> >>> a
> >>> Sunday or Labor Day--why would they have included an actual film
> >>> when
> >>> a fake would have been so much better, and would not have looked
> >>> like
> >>> possibly a missile? The smoke and fireball--how do we know that
> >>> wasn't artwork? So many of the clips of wtc2 do not match in
> >>> coloration--deliberately I suppose to make it look different
> >>> cameras,
> >>> rather than different forgers.
> >>>
> >>> It was shown the next morning--could they have had two clips to
> >>> choose
> >>> from--one fake, one real? The whatchamacallits that are in the
> >>> sky,
> >>> could these be the mark of a whistleblower, unnoticed by
> >>> supervisors,
> >>> and only a researcher would discover?
> >>>
> >>> The distance still should have enabled a clearer resolution than we
> >>> got. I just don't see these guys risking showing real clips.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://www.405themovie.com/download405.asp
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@...>
> >>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:20 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Brilliant
> >>>
> >>> EXCEPT -- You seem to be lumping the first hit footage, which is
> >>> authentic snuff film -with the second hit cartoons.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> malaprop wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Alex, and all, you gotta change your perception.
> >>>>
> >>>> We are not dealing with a government--that's their disguise. We
> >>>> are
> >>>> dealing with organized crime that took over the governement to
> >>>> facilitate their illegal operations, and to develop new ones. They
> >>>> do
> >>>> not care about duty honor country, and that goes for Congress, and
> >>>> a
> >>>> chunk of military brass. A ton of military retirements happened
> >>>> after
> >>>> 9/11, meaning the good ones left.
> >>>>
> >>>> CNN heads and other TV media are as guilty as the ones that placed
> >>>> the
> >>>> bombs, and were in on the planning as was needed to synchronize
> >>>> the
> >>>> event. They had to be. I'm now of the opinion, or at least
> >>>> leaning
> >>>> that way, that ALL footage seen that day prior to the collapses
> >>>> was
> >>>> ready-made off the shelf, some impact shots were held back to keep
> >>>> up
> >>>> a psychological fever pitch over a period of time. This was a
> >>>> script,
> >>>> and looking back I do not see them risking any snafus when
> >>>> deception
> >>>> is so easy. Even the "gashes" were pre-packaged, and only a
> >>>> resemblance was necessary thru bomb placement.
> >>>>
> >>>> The only planes ever seen were those on the TV screen, and anyone
> >>>> who
> >>>> suggested otherwise was ignored. The TV anchors reported what
> >>>> they
> >>>> saw on their monitors.
> >>>>
> >>>> I feel that all the CNN people were over time replaced with
> >>>> hand-picked Bush/elite supporters. The last thing you want
> >>>> around
> >>>> you is someone who thinks and "gets it", so out they go. They may
> >>>> all
> >>>> Zionists, for that matter,
> >>>>
> >>>> So that means that they will never allow let alone encourage the
> >>>> truth
> >>>> to come out about how CNN plotted against America.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: "alexldent" <alexldent@...>
> >>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:29 AM
> >>>> Subject: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> A couple of thoughts:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1) not all of the media are perps. It seems like we should be
> >>>> able
> >>>> to
> >>>> get some
> >>>> decent-minded media types to turn on the bad guys.
> >>>>
> >>>> 2) a couple of years ago, there was hardly any talk of the WTC
> >>>> being
> >>>> blown
> >>>> up. Now demolition is all over the place and fairly widely
> >>>> accepted
> >>>> by 9/11
> >>>> skeptics. I predict in another year or two, video manipulation
> >>>> will
> >>>> just as
> >>>> widely accepted-- if we work at it. The important thing, the
> >>>> video
> >>>> fakery is so
> >>>> damn obvous once you know where to look.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Nico Haupt"
> >>>> <nicohaupt@>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> >>>>>> Von: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@>
> >>>>>> An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>> Betreff: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> >>>>>> Datum: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:59:12 -0600
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Maybe i just needed a refreshing pusher.
> >>>>> I will not give up yet :)
> >>>>> There is also still enough space to give the perps a hard time...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let's work on the 'prank' soon. I have now my tv team together.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>> ahem.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>> We've turned a corner on them, and suddenly you decide there's
> >>>>> nothing
> >>>>> left to do but pray, and we're too late and too small?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Heh.
> >>>>> Four years ago I figured there was nothing to do but pray cos we
> >>>>> were
> >>>>> too late and all there was was me - alone - having noticed there
> >>>>> was
> >>>>> no
> >>>>> plane at the first hit -- my first real clue how to dump the
> >>>>> whole
> >>>>> frameup.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Talk about asymmetrical odds!!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is four years and some later, and I am still alive, a fact
> >>>>> that
> >>>>> amazes me all by itself.
> >>>>> We've managed to drive the lemmings back from the cliff numerous
> >>>>> times
> >>>>> while we work out how to release them from their lemming spell.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Now we are looking forward to a national tour
> >>>>> http://911bluestour.com/
> >>>>> To boogie our way to freedom.<<
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
> >>>>> NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:45:07 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: Re: Re:02/20 NYC

Here's my perps:
http://thewebfairy.com/911/uav

I've got a couple missing links I've seen but can't put my finger on
right now.
One actually mentioned the ability to remote control a flock of drones.
But that was long before I figured out that that is what I was seeing..

At full speed, this is the part that looks like a "plane" with stubby wings
http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/missilegate6.htm
You can see that this effect is being generated in several different
distinct places.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/066.htm

The concentration of black is partially artifact. The Focus Magic also
creates a sense of solitidy which is artifact also.
If these pictures were "clear" then they would be fakes.
This level of detail is never seen in cartoons, which are blobby and
flatly colored.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/066.htm

Since the crimescene footage shows several different objects creating
several different explosions now, we can backtrack that it must have
been several different objects previously as well.

This group had some great photos of uavs including some near car size
ones in the archives a couple months back. I need to hunt those too.

Anybody who can help me with links about these small drones --who's
existance did make MSM including in Wired Magazine -- I am grateful.

Anybody who wants to learn to crack these images out of the Naudet DVD
for themselves, I'm happy to teach folks how I did it. It's not hard and
can be accomplished using free software.

Just unfocus your eyes and chase away the urge to do a rosarch-blot
style instant identification.
The larger bulges are not the objects I am talking about. That part is
the soon to explode clouds of explosive dust, which I believe to be
aerosolized thermite.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/haarp/beamweapon.htm
The process is mentioned here.

alexldent wrote:
> Rosalee, with all due respect, could you explain or show more clearly how
> you know that it is a flock of drones in the naudet video? This explanation
> simply is not very clear to me and I supect to a lot of people as well.
>
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <webfairy@...>
> wrote:
>
>> http://missilegate.com
>>
>> [[I unable to see the
>> swarm of UAV's in the air?]]
>>
>> Do you see anything in the air?
>> Do you see something moving?
>> That's the swarm of drones flying in a close formation.
>> They split up once they reach the corner of the building.
>> At this point one seems to split off and stay on the roof while at least two
>>
> others come down the face of the building. Later we see the third building
> dustpimples higher up on the building. There is also a white shiny triangular
> one that is persistant off to the side on both hits seen as a white triangle
> shape. I expect this is the control center for zapping the drones around like a
> video game with real effects..
>
>> Most of these objects are around car size.
>> You can't see something carsize clearly from that distance, especially since
>>
> there seems to be some sort of electronic pulse going on that makes things
> fuzzy until after the explosion.
>
>> Look at the big picture of the flashframe on
>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
>>
>> there is another showing which has disrupted the pattern of the flash in the
>>
> lower righthand section of the flash.
>
>> Can you sorta see it?
>>
>> Thank you for questions I need to answer for my missilegate site.
>>
>> Jimmy Walters wrote me back, disappointed that it's all pictures and no
>>
> words.
>
>> It all seems so obvious that I can never figure out what to say.
>> I am suprised what little skill paople have at observation.
>> They can only see words programmed on their bellyscreens.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> malaprop wrote:
>>
>>> "Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
>>> less.
>>> It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
>>> what
>>> you would do if you was a perp."
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if some Maalox all around isn't called for, but I know
>>> that putting one'self in the perp's shoes is one of the oldest methods
>>> of working on a crime. Sort of a reverse engineering.
>>>
>>> On the subject at hand, you say the existance of these drones has even
>>> be bragged about.......and while I can see 3 puffs on contact--which
>>> could correspond to the 2 engines, nose--why am I unable to see the
>>> swarm of UAV's in the air?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@...>
>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:29 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
>>>
>>>
>>> Idjuts from the Frameup on Humanity are blind.
>>> Even blinder than your average schnookiedupe who isn't much at
>>> observation either, but when it comes to brainwashed perps, they see
>>> STRICTLY what they are told to see. Things make no impression on their
>>> eyes. They live inside their own imagination.
>>>
>>> IF you don't believe I am blind and stupid as it's really you being,
>>> knock yourself out of this dreamland where you think everything has to
>>> be "rational' as in pre-thought and predigested.
>>> You are making me think that you are a "Jesuit Adjudicator" --since it
>>> was your comment that (choke choke) the vatican is not perps -- that
>>> got
>>> Captain May a high temperature roasting.
>>>
>>> Again, ALL perplings of what every faction are going to unite on the
>>> FICTION that the first hit is animation. You might as well show your
>>> face now.
>>>
>>> The missilegate frames are authentic and they show REAL CIA-style
>>> drones
>>> running in a pack and creating gray clouds of aerosolized thermite
>>> explosions. The existance of these drones has been bragged about
>>> even.
>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/uav
>>>
>>> I hate to pull an "expert" card, but I am an unparralled and unrivaled
>>> expert in the study of the first hit footage. Yes, it can be and has
>>> been faked.
>>> Marcus Icke has extremely sophisticated techniques for turning the
>>> drones and explosives into a "plane" to suit his own diabolical need
>>> to
>>> keep the ball in the air.
>>> But at least he documented his techniques carefully, so we have a
>>> clear
>>> record of how images could be faked if they were.
>>>
>>> I can do hyper-enlargements of Marcus faked planes and see how they
>>> stack up to the work known real.
>>> heh!!
>>>
>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
>>> has one of marcus's so called "enhancements" that he palmed off on
>>> SPINEless which were really only fanciful artwork.
>>>
>>> Marcus always concentrated on just a couple frames. He could never
>>> reanimate his work.
>>> My missilegate frames
>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
>>> reanimate perfectly which is their Purity Seal that they haven't been
>>> mucked with in any way foul.
>>>
>>> I've seen the pattern -- people cling to their (proudly) ininformed
>>> opinion and act like the results of my four years careful analysis
>>> means
>>> less than their digestion.
>>>
>>> Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
>>> less.
>>> It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
>>> what
>>> you would do if you was a perp.
>>>
>>> The only thing changed about the missilegate frames is a few frames
>>> were
>>> nipped out from the thing-in-the-air and the things-in-front-of-the
>>> building because the continuity from one frame to the next is broken,
>>> but it is always the same formation of objects with subtle
>>> differences,
>>> no cookiecutter mode but different complex angles that could not be
>>> modeled in.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> malaprop wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> No, of course I don't think your blind or stupid.
>>>>
>>>> But my mind has a mind of it's own, and insists on going trapesing
>>>> from time to time, poking here and there. Right now it is
>>>> juggling
>>>> with them having a backup copy--just in case the real one revealed
>>>> more than they wanted--finding it non-threatening decided on the
>>>> real
>>>> clip. But I think they had the ability to animate everything
>>>> except
>>>> the CD.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@...>
>>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 5:38 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have been studying this footage close up and personal for four
>>>> years
>>>> and better now....
>>>>
>>>> Do you really think that I am so blind and stupid as to not be able
>>>> to
>>>> pick up IN FOUR YEARS OF CLOSE STUDY if the first hit imagery was
>>>> fake?
>>>>
>>>> The implicent insult to my intelligence, character and motivation
>>>> tucked
>>>> inside this particular craphead lie has managed to set off my anger
>>>> repeatedly and alienate friends.
>>>> I think I have learned my lesson now and will remain calm even tho I
>>>> percieve your tubby idea is more insulting than the insult I
>>>> moderated
>>>> somebody for.
>>>>
>>>> I have known I need to put words to the Missilegate, and I wrote the
>>>> words during a similarly distasteful session with Peter Meyer and
>>>> Lynn
>>>> which isn't posted anywhere yet, but does need to be posted as
>>>> commentary to the missilegate frames.
>>>>
>>>> These are real, authentic, WAY WAY too detailed images to have
>>>> originated as any form of animation or cartoon....
>>>> http:://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig/beautyshots
>>>> compare with the enlargements of the "tailfin" on the Pentagon Art
>>>> Frames.
>>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/multiframes.htm
>>>> click any of the titles above the sets of pictures to be wisked away
>>>> to
>>>> commentary which links to enlargements of most sets of art frames.
>>>>
>>>> The Beautyshots are infinitely detailed.
>>>> These are artistically enhanced enlargements at least 10,000 times
>>>> enlarged and they still show subtle character.
>>>> In the art frames, even a 300 percent enlargement of the "tailfin"
>>>> equals flat characterless monocolor.
>>>>
>>>> No animation technique could do that.
>>>> It took months or years to produce a version of the Pentagon Art
>>>> Frames
>>>> which could be animated for video.
>>>>
>>>> In the Missilegate Frames, The complex and peculiar nature of the
>>>> images
>>>> remains complex and peculiar no matter how they are dealt.
>>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
>>>> All the cartoons show a "plane" pushed along kind of like a rubber
>>>> stamp.
>>>> Not here:
>>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/beautyshots
>>>>
>>>> Since it bothers me so bad, All the Anti_Webfairy types are going
>>>> band
>>>> together to pass off that those aren't really a flock of top secret
>>>> drones, but a cartoon, just to keep the lies in play.
>>>>
>>>> It is real. It is a real snuff film.
>>>> http:..911foreknowledge.com
>>>> at most they have snipped out a few frames because there are
>>>> continuity
>>>> lapses.
>>>> Whatever is there is set out to brag -- as the perps laugh cos you
>>>> can
>>>> wave this stuff in front of their face and you'd rather call me an
>>>> incompetent liar than face that last straw that favors "rationality"
>>>> over reason.
>>>>
>>>> If one thing is a cartoon, then everything is a cartoon is a very
>>>> primitive logic pattern for which I have no respect. It's the sort
>>>> of
>>>> slimeballing I'd expect from Break For News.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> malaprop wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I am, as this is where I am at. With it being so risk-free to
>>>>> use
>>>>> pre-packaged video, why would they use the Naudet film of the
>>>>> impact?
>>>>> Taking it apart, it looks like the opening could have been shot on
>>>>> a
>>>>> Sunday or Labor Day--why would they have included an actual film
>>>>> when
>>>>> a fake would have been so much better, and would not have looked
>>>>> like
>>>>> possibly a missile? The smoke and fireball--how do we know that
>>>>> wasn't artwork? So many of the clips of wtc2 do not match in
>>>>> coloration--deliberately I suppose to make it look different
>>>>> cameras,
>>>>> rather than different forgers.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was shown the next morning--could they have had two clips to
>>>>> choose
>>>>> from--one fake, one real? The whatchamacallits that are in the
>>>>> sky,
>>>>> could these be the mark of a whistleblower, unnoticed by
>>>>> supervisors,
>>>>> and only a researcher would discover?
>>>>>
>>>>> The distance still should have enabled a clearer resolution than we
>>>>> got. I just don't see these guys risking showing real clips.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.405themovie.com/download405.asp
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@...>
>>>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:20 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Brilliant
>>>>>
>>>>> EXCEPT -- You seem to be lumping the first hit footage, which is
>>>>> authentic snuff film -with the second hit cartoons.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> malaprop wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Alex, and all, you gotta change your perception.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We are not dealing with a government--that's their disguise. We
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> dealing with organized crime that took over the governement to
>>>>>> facilitate their illegal operations, and to develop new ones. They
>>>>>> do
>>>>>> not care about duty honor country, and that goes for Congress, and
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> chunk of military brass. A ton of military retirements happened
>>>>>> after
>>>>>> 9/11, meaning the good ones left.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CNN heads and other TV media are as guilty as the ones that placed
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> bombs, and were in on the planning as was needed to synchronize
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> event. They had to be. I'm now of the opinion, or at least
>>>>>> leaning
>>>>>> that way, that ALL footage seen that day prior to the collapses
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> ready-made off the shelf, some impact shots were held back to keep
>>>>>> up
>>>>>> a psychological fever pitch over a period of time. This was a
>>>>>> script,
>>>>>> and looking back I do not see them risking any snafus when
>>>>>> deception
>>>>>> is so easy. Even the "gashes" were pre-packaged, and only a
>>>>>> resemblance was necessary thru bomb placement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only planes ever seen were those on the TV screen, and anyone
>>>>>> who
>>>>>> suggested otherwise was ignored. The TV anchors reported what
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> saw on their monitors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel that all the CNN people were over time replaced with
>>>>>> hand-picked Bush/elite supporters. The last thing you want
>>>>>> around
>>>>>> you is someone who thinks and "gets it", so out they go. They may
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> Zionists, for that matter,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So that means that they will never allow let alone encourage the
>>>>>> truth
>>>>>> to come out about how CNN plotted against America.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "alexldent" <alexldent@...>
>>>>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:29 AM
>>>>>> Subject: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A couple of thoughts:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) not all of the media are perps. It seems like we should be
>>>>>> able
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> get some
>>>>>> decent-minded media types to turn on the bad guys.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) a couple of years ago, there was hardly any talk of the WTC
>>>>>> being
>>>>>> blown
>>>>>> up. Now demolition is all over the place and fairly widely
>>>>>> accepted
>>>>>> by 9/11
>>>>>> skeptics. I predict in another year or two, video manipulation
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> just as
>>>>>> widely accepted-- if we work at it. The important thing, the
>>>>>> video
>>>>>> fakery is so
>>>>>> damn obvous once you know where to look.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Nico Haupt"
>>>>>> <nicohaupt@>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
>>>>>>>> Von: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@>
>>>>>>>> An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
>>>>>>>> Datum: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:59:12 -0600
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe i just needed a refreshing pusher.
>>>>>>> I will not give up yet :)
>>>>>>> There is also still enough space to give the perps a hard time...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's work on the 'prank' soon. I have now my tv team together.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ahem.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We've turned a corner on them, and suddenly you decide there's
>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>> left to do but pray, and we're too late and too small?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Heh.
>>>>>>> Four years ago I figured there was nothing to do but pray cos we
>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>> too late and all there was was me - alone - having noticed there
>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>> plane at the first hit -- my first real clue how to dump the
>>>>>>> whole
>>>>>>> frameup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Talk about asymmetrical odds!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is four years and some later, and I am still alive, a fact
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> amazes me all by itself.
>>>>>>> We've managed to drive the lemmings back from the cliff numerous
>>>>>>> times
>>>>>>> while we work out how to release them from their lemming spell.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now we are looking forward to a national tour
>>>>>>> http://911bluestour.com/
>>>>>>> To boogie our way to freedom.<<
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
>>>>>>> NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 10
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 11:29:58 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: 911 Myths and Dr Greening's Report

a post from
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/01/332076.html
(which is now officially "hidden")

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/01/332076.html?c=on#c142949

911myths??

/*23.02.2006 14:20*/

It has been noted that Dr Greening’s report is now available having
undergone some alteration.
However there remain serious flaws within the assumptions made and these
are having the effect of rendering the conclusions almost worthless.
The main flaw in this report, regarding the collapse is contained within
the authors derivation and use of the strain energy requirements to
collapse a single floor.

This flaw has as its source the assumptions implied within the bottom
paragraph of page 19. The author states, “As noted in Section 4.2 the
236 perimeter and 47 core support columns have an effective cross
sectional area of …..10.15 m^2.………we conclude that the supports at a
given floor would fail if the downward compressive load exceeded about
4000MN.”
The author then goes on to compute a “collapse safety factor of about 3”
for that storey.

The author is stating that the same amount of force would be required to
produce failure in any of the storeys. This is plainly wrong since the
upper storeys were made of relatively light material section and in some
portions, I-section columns, whereas the bottom storeys comprised
relatively heavy section box columns.
The author seems to apply a belief that the tower support structures
were of the same cross sectional area throughout the height of the tower.

A similar flaw occurs when the author discusses strain energy. Firstly
and most importantly he uses the same value, 600MJ, for each of the
storeys within the structure. There is no way this can be true and the
values would lie over a wide range. For instance the 100th storey
normally carries the ten storeys and the hat truss above and would be
built with this in mind. The tenth floor would carry 100 upper storeys
and the hat truss, so its geometry would reflect this. The author’s use
of a constant value for this strain energy requirement does not reflect
the situation which actually did exist.

Neither does the author take regard of the elastic strain energy
absorbed by storeys other than the topmost storey of the lower section.
To be able to cause a failure in those storey columns a force would have
to be exerted by the falling upper section and this force would also act
on all of the storeys below the impact and also on those above the
impact point. The initial impact force exerted and thus the force
required to cause buckling failure at the upper levels would not be
sufficient to cause these failures at lower levels, but the effect of
the force would still be some elastic deflection of all other storeys.
The size of the deflection caused would vary from storey to storey and
would be in the same ratios as the static load ratios for each storey.
The energy requirement for this energy would vary dependent upon the
number of storeys remaining but would always be a prerequisite to
continued collapse.
The effect of ignoring this phenomenon is to ignore a large energy
requirement that has to be satisfied before the collapse can continue.
The energy ignored would be the difference between the average of the
applied load over one storey’s resultant elastic deflection, and the
average of the applied load over all storeys resultant elastic deflection.

The author examines the distance over which the failure load would act
and these figures he gives are around 0.11 metres (p31)from a storey
height of 3.7m. So he contends that after less than 3% of its length the
columns would thereafter offer no further resistance to the falling
mass. This contradicts accepted theory most notably contained within BZ
that a minimum 3% vertical deflection would be required to even initiate
buckling points. BZ show that the required force reduces from that point
but it does not at any time fall below 25% of the initial failure value.
The author justifies his use of these small values of deflection by
stating that actual failure occurred in the fixings between column
sections rather than column failure itself . But this cannot be the case
because we know from BZ that buckling points would only appear after 3%
vertical deflection. There would be no buckle points at the vertical
deflections used by the authors. Buckle points or a horizontal
deflection of the column midpoint are necessary for the downward acting
mass force to be able to gain a moment through which to apply a force on
the fixings.
No buckling=> no moment=> no force=> no failure.
The author at one point suggests he is using compressive failure modes.
Again the contention that total and catastrophic failure, resulting in
an inability to transmit any force whatsoever, would occur after a
deflection of only 3% is contradictory to accepted knowledge of
compressive failures, which exhibit deformations of up to 40% with
varying load requirements before ultimate failure results in an
inability to carry any load whatsoever.

Neither do his own figures tie together
His figure of a failure load for storey 80 was 4000MN.(p19) This force
acting over a distance of 0.11 metres would give a maximum energy
requirement of 440MJ. But this is in contradiction to his figure for
energy requirements to collapse one storey, being 600 MJ.
For these two figures to be satisfied it would be required that the
force acted over a distance of a minimum of 0.15metres and in actuality
a greater distance than this since the load would be zero at time = 0
rising to a maximum. The author gives no reason for this discrepancy.

Let us now examine the actual value of strain energy requirement for
collapse. The author has identified the strain energy requirement for
the first 3% of the vertical deflection of the buckling columns. We know
from BZ that the remaining 97% of the vertical deflection will require a
further energy input of some ten times this amount. So using a very
rough approximation we can argue that the energy requirement is of the
order of some ten times greater than the value used by the author. Even
if we included a factor to allow a pessimistic view of early fracture
and did this by allowing that only half of this additional requirement
has to be met, we can see that the new value would still be of the order
of some five times greater than the value used by the author.
To demonstrate the relative size of the energies involved let us assume
for the moment that the aircraft was travelling slightly faster than the
author has assumed, and let that assumption be that the velocity was
240ms^-1 rather than the 220ms^-1. This is not an absurd suggestion
since it reflects the velocity given by the NIST report. We now see that
the aircraft impact energy would be increased from the 3.0 x 10^9 J
which the author uses to about 3.6 x 10^9 J. Thus an additional 600MJ
would be available and according to the authors figures this would be
sufficient to take out all of the perimeter columns and all the core
columns on one entire storey. This would be in addition to the damage
which we did witness being caused. Is this realistic? The aircraft
velocity increased by a mere 20ms^-1, now has the energy to destroy an
additional entire storey? This in itself casts doubt upon the relative
size of these figures.

So what can be salvaged from this report? The author has demonstrated
that the collapse times which were actually observed on the day, were
consistent with a value of strain energy requirement to collapse each
floor of around 600 - 800 MJ. Thus it can be shown that only by
application of strain energy requirements of this order could the
observed collapse times have been achieved. Since the values of strain
energy were demonstrably higher than those used by the author we must
conclude that since the observed collapse times were achieved then some
mechanism must have applied in order for the energy requirements to be
reduced to the levels used by the author. Without the removal of that
ability the collapse times could not have been achieved.

Gordon Ross 23rd February 2006
*gordon ross*
mail *e-mail:* gordonjross@yahoo.com <mailto:gordonjross@yahoo.com>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 11
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:28:20 +0100 (MET)
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>
Subject: UAE -DPW- Ports deal: Bush had DPW ties!

http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?17.2363.0#2490
Scripting "Terror Soap": Yemen, UAE etc...
Thu Feb 23 2006

Pt.5: Speculations about political ploys or setups

If Bush is telling the truth that he didn't know about the arab ports deal,
or is 'victim' of a sophisticated setup against him, has yet to be
established.

Fact is the story works in everyone's hands, is a win-win situation and
re-establishes the official story of 9/11.

White House: Bush didn't know of ports deal till after approval
San Jose Mercury News, USA - 6 hours ago
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/13940648.htm

Fact is also, that in January 2006, Bush "nominated one of DPW's senior
executives, David C. Sanborn, to serve as maritime administrator, an
important transportation appointment reporting directly to Secretary of
Transportation Norman Mineta...
(http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48907 )

Mr. Sanford, a graduate of the U.S. Merchant Maritime Academy, joined DPW in
2005. Before being nominated to be maritime administrator, Mr. Sanford
served as DPW's director of Operations for Europe and Latin America...

...The financing for the transaction reveals even more clearly that DPW is a
governmental agency fronted as a commercial entity. Barclays Capital, the
investment banking division of Barclays Bank PLC and Deutsche Bank AG are
organizing an international lending syndicate to create a $6.3 billion term
loan and a $200 million revolving facility in a $6.5 billion loan deal to
finance the acquisition...

--
Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 12
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:43:05 +0100 (MET)
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>
Subject: new anti-CD roach at DU

...the battle of disinfo agents or -dupes isn't over... :(

Why there were NO BOMBS planted at the
WTC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=72476&mesg_id=72476
http://tinyurl.com/qdjeo
Thu Feb-23-06 08:39 AM
by benburch

--
DSL-Aktion wegen großer Nachfrage bis 28.2.2006 verlängert:
GMX DSL-Flatrate 1 Jahr kostenlos* http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 13
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 11:47:03 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: [Fwd: Final comment/ Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Pentalawn presentation]]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Final comment/ Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd:
Your Pentalawn presentation]
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:40:38 -0800
From: Devvy Kidd <devvyk@earthlink.net>
Reply-To: devvyk@earthlink.net
To: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>, Gerard Holmgren
<holmgren@iinet.net.au>
CC: killtown@yahoo.com, BATR@yahoogroups.com

Regarding Mr. Giltner's comments below:

Bill Giltner wrote:
> I just went to newswithviews.com to reivew Ms. Kidd's postings.
> >From what I can see, she hasn't even dealt with 9/11 since Sept.
> 2005, and this is the article she wrote:
>
> http://newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd125.htm
>
> There can be no doubt she is "not helpful" (a phrase Rumsfeld loves
> to say). Is it possible that many, many of the left gatekeepers and
> people like Ms. Kidd are just comfortable with the status quo of
> their place in the world, and think the upheaval of people knowing
> the truth will upset their little lives? Is there some other
> explanation?
>
Mr. Giltner seems to be comfortable slinging untruths around without
anything to back them up.

So, you went to NWVs and I have no postings on 9/11 since last
September? That is a bald faced lie, Mr. Giltner. My columns since then
are posted on NWVs. As a matter of fact, if you scroll way down, you
will see that I supplied the URL's for Mr. Holmgren. This doesn't even
begin to cover the ones that are archived from my own web site over the
years.

Mr. Giltner states I am "not helpful" and am comfortable with the status
quo and that knowing the truth will upset "their little lives." Such
ignorance of me, my writings and all I have tried to do to further the
truth about 9/11 doesn't even warrant a response.

With all due respect to you folks, none of this accomplishes anything
towards getting the truth exposed. I have written all about 9/11 as much
as possible. I drove all the way to Shanksville, PA on my own money to
conduct face to face interviews with witnesses who live there and have
no reason to lie. I know the Coroner is lying and all of this is covered
in the report I wrote up about my very expensive trip to PA. Did any of
you shell out a few grand to go to the actual site and interview anyone?

I have bent over backwards trying to get people to see that 9/11 is
based on a mountain of lies and is the justification for the
unconstitutional invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

However, nothing seems to please you people except making accusations
against me because I suggested that your presentation of Penta Lawn
might be better served with less sarcasm.

I'm afraid I have to bow out of this discussion as I have two legal
briefs due on two of my FOIA lawsuits in the DC courts and I have to get
them to the post office by noon.

Cordially,

Devvy Kidd

* * * *

----- Original Message -----
*From:* Rosalee Grable <mailto:webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
*To: *Gerard Holmgren <mailto:holmgren@iinet.net.au>
*Cc: *devvyk@earthlink.net <mailto:devvyk@earthlink.net>;
killtown@yahoo.com <mailto:killtown@yahoo.com>; BATR@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:BATR@yahoogroups.com>
*Sent:* 2/23/2006 8:56:57 AM
*Subject:* Re: Reply/ Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful"
Fwd: Your Pentalawn presentation]

http://newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd125.htm
features a couple interesting pictures.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as
"respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation]
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:44:57 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>

This is one of her pictures, from two weeks after.
Notice the grass has been all covered up, just like they did at the
pentagon.

http://www.devvy.com/photos/Flight93/orig_david_hess_one.jpg

Whatever created the Empty Hole with No Plane In IT
had a radiation that affected cameras just like happened at all the
other crimescenes.

http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/emptyhole.htm

and seems to have blighted trees, according to this picture she says
comes from the FBI
Notice the blight pattern has a purple cast and is circular.

http://www.devvy.com/photos/Flight93/orig_fbi_flight_93.jpg

Gerard Holmgren wrote:
> Heh ! Well if the "offensive tag" is so hard to take, then be more careful
> about dishing it out.
>
> So perhaps we can take the heat down a little now, in case there's been a
> genuine misunderstanding, but the next you time you want to play the
> "offensive to those who died " card, remember that you don't have a monopoly
> on it.
>
> To test your dedication to exposing the truth, can you refer to any
> published article of yours which deals with
>
> a) no planes hit any buildings that day and no plane crashed in PA
>
> b) two of the allegedly hijacked flights did not even exist
>
> c) independent of point b, the media published bogus passenger lists for the
> mythical flight 11
>
> d) The two allegedly hijacked flights which did actually exist, appear not
> to have crashed anywhere, because they were still registered as valid on the
> FAA aircraft registry for more than four years after.
>
> If you are familiar with these issues , then surely you've published
> something on them. Please supply the links. If you haven't yet published
> anything on those issues, then when do you intend to ?
>
> If the material is new to you, and you haven't yet had time to study it,
> that's fine - please say so if this is the case, but if you didn't actually
> know anything about the issues, then please learn the lesson of
> thoughtlessly dishing out the "offensive to those who died" tag on things
> about which you know nothing.
>
> If you have studied the material and dispute it, then say so straight out.
>
> Looking forward to a straight answer.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Devvy Kidd [mailto:devvyk@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Friday, 24 February 2006 3:16 AM
> To: Gerard Holmgren; webfairy@thewebfairy.com; killtown@yahoo.com;
> 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Reply/ Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta
> lawn presentation]
>
> Dear Mr. Holmgren:
>
> I always like to wake up to mail accusing me of being a liar, a racist,
> supporting a cover up the lies about 9/11 and supporting the evil agenda of
> the Cheney/Bush administration.
>
> Let me see if I have this straight. I sent the following e-mail last night:
>
> Subject: Your Penta lawn presentation
> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:40:55 -0800
> From: devvyk@earthlink.net
>
> To: webfairy@thewebfairy.com
>
> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
>
> I don't know who to address this mail to, but I found your link off
> Rense.com tonight.
>
> Your Penta Lawn presentation is in very poor taste. I am fully aware of
> the fairy tale told by the criminals who run our government, but people
> died in the Pentagon that day. Decent Americans who were guilty of nothing
> more than going to work.
>
> Your sarcastic portrayal degrades and makes fun of a horrible, horrible
> event and the cover up.
>
> I believe you would be better served to show some respect for those who
> died that day. Can you imagine a father, son, wife, husband, son or
> daughter who happens on this page and sees this mockery of that day? Can
> you take a moment to think about how they would feel seeing how you are
> making fun of something so horrible?
>
> To me, this is as tasteless as the web site that boasts "Find the
> airplane" re Flight 93. I was in PA last summer and I can tell you, this
> crash deeply affected the people who live in the surrounding area and that
> web site that makes fun of "Find the Plane" "Let's Roll" It has hurt a lof
> of those decent folks - people who had nothing to do with Bush's policy
> making or anything else.
>
> If you want to be taken seriously, please change your presentation to
> something professional and respectful of our dead fellow Americans while
> getting your scientific point to the reader.
>
> Devvy Kidd
>
> No where in my comments above do I see support of the government's cover
> up, racisim nor have I lied in my comments. I sent you that e-mail because
> we are trying to get shell shocked Americans to sit up and pay attention to
> all the discepancies regarding 9/11. Most Americans who don't have a clue
> still do remember the horrible images of that day. When one clicks on a web
> page that is so sarcastic and pokes fun at what happened, I believe you
> will lose an otherwise interested reader because they become offended by
> the flip attitude of "Penta Lawn." I fail to see how this makes me a liar,
> a racist, etc.
>
> Your knee jerk reaction is most unfortunate, Mr. Holmgren. I know of your
> work and my dear friend, Jerry Longspaugh, speaks very highly of you. I
> have covered 9/11 extensively and you do me a grave injustice with all your
> baseless and unfounded accusations. I have received other mail this morning
> repeating these charges.
>
> For your edification, below is a list of some of my columns on 9/11 which
> include the strongest condemnation of the use of DU killing tens of
> thousands of innocent Iraqi's, Afghani's and American soliders.
>
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd71.htm
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd77.htm
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd79.htm
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd125.htm
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd151.htm
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd155.htm
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd162.htm
> http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd164.htm
>
> Cordially,
>
> Devvy Kidd
>
> * * * * * * * * *
>
> [Original Message]
> From: Gerard Holmgren <holmgren@iinet.net.au>
> To: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>; <devvyk@earthlink.net>;
> Killtown <killtown@yahoo.com>
> Date: 2/22/2006 11:50:23 PM
>
> Subject: RE: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta
> lawn presentation]
>
> Devvy,
>
> can you please tell us what's "respectful" about spreading bullshit about
> plane crashes which never happened ? For whoever did die that day (and we
> don't really know who or how many ) the truth should be told.
>
> Also, do you realize how truly distasteful your remarks are to those who
> have managed to survive the genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan, which was
> launched as the result of this bullshit story ? Hundreds of thousands,
> killed , maimed, traumatized and disposed - and it looks like we've only
> seen the beginning of it.
>
> Yet meanwhile you cover up for the lies of the war criminals by spreading
> bullshit about non existent planes - all for the sake of supposed respect
> for a few Americans - some of whom may not even have died anyway.
>
> You think a few Americans are worth more than a few hundred thousand
> raggyheads? Is that your attitude ?
>
> If not, then think more fully through the disgraceful racism inherinet in
> your message.
>
> There were no such flights as AA11 or 77 that day.
>
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/1177.html
>
> Independent of that proof,
>
> Media Published Fake Passenger lists for American Airlines flight 11.
>
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/fake.html
>
> You think it's "respectful" to publish fake passenger lists ?
>
> UA 93 and 175 almost certainly did not crash as they were registered as
> valid on the FAA aircraft registry for more than four years afterwards.
>
> Go to the FAA aircraft registry
>
> http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm
>
> and do an "n number" search for N591UA ( UA 93 on Sept 11) and N612UA (UA
> 175 on Sept 11).
>
> I find your attitude offensive, disrespectful and racist.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rosalee Grable [mailto:webfairy@thewebfairy.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2006 6:23 PM
> To: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com; devvyk@earthlink.net; Gerard Holmgren;
> Killtown
> Subject: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn
> presentation]
>
> I would never have guessed that Devvy Kidd would come on like a word I'd
> have to moderate myself for.
>
> People were affected by Empty Hole 93 so we should pretend the hole wasn't
> empty for their sake? What a twisty rotgut form of logic~~ I don't think
> it's the least bit funny that they created a 15 foot smoldering hole and
> tried to pretend a plane crashed in it. The Mayor, one of the first people
> on the scene didn't see any sign of any plane.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor1.htm
> He did see FEMA guys there prematurely tho. flash video:
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor.htm
>
> A Reporter says there is nothing but a ten foot gash.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/hole.htm
>
> I had a friend visit there too.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/crimescene.htm
> She says it's on the grounds of a secret base.
>
> The Pentalawn page is a good natured factual accounting.
> It has been picked up by
> http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=8022
>
> I would have thought better of Devvy Kidd. How disappointing that this
> person thinks that humorless porkies are respectful, but a careful
> accounting of common sense fact isn't?
> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html leads to a whole section
> that carefully documents this crime.
> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html
> This is an intensely respectful memorial, but what it respects is truth.
>
> What is this world coming to that lying about how people died is supposed
> to be a form of respect?
>
> It seems to me that those people's lives would be vindicated by the real
> facts coming out.
> THEY DIDN"T USE PLANES.
> They used lies.
> It is a good clue why this world is going down the tubes when somebody
> with the previously fine reputation of Devvy Kidd starts advocating lying
> as a form of politeness.
>
>
> ------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Your Penta lawn presentation
> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:40:55 -0800
> From: devvyk@earthlink.net
>
> To: webfairy@thewebfairy.com
>
> http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
>
> I don't know who to address this mail to, but I found your link off
> Rense.com tonight.
>
> Your Penta Lawn presentation is in very poor taste. I am fully aware of
> the fairy tale told by the criminals who run our government, but people
> died in the Pentagon that day. Decent Americans who were guilty of nothing
> more than going to work.
>
> Your sarcastic portrayal degrades and makes fun of a horrible, horrible
> event and the cover up.
>
> I believe you would be better served to show some respect for those who
> died that day. Can you imagine a father, son, wife, husband, son or
> daughter who happens on this page and sees this mockery of that day? Can
> you take a moment to think about how they would feel seeing how you are
> making fun of something so horrible?
>
> To me, this is as tasteless as the web site that boasts "Find the
> airplane" re Flight 93. I was in PA last summer and I can tell you, this
> crash deeply affected the people who live in the surrounding area and that
> web site that makes fun of "Find the Plane" "Let's Roll" It has hurt a lof
> of those decent folks - people who had nothing to do with Bush's policy
> making or anything else.
>
> If you want to be taken seriously, please change your presentation to
> something professional and respectful of our dead fellow Americans while
> getting your scientific point to the reader.
>
> Devvy Kidd
>
>
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 14
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:10:15 -0000
From: "Lynn Ertell" <lynnertell@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Devvy Kidd advocates Lying as "respectful" Fwd: Your Penta lawn presentation

re: Manipulation of "Christian" memes to sidetrack and divert the movemnt.

I was recently banned fron "911truthaction", for pointing out
precisely the same thing.
One "Christian" member (Kevin Hammond) took offense at my remarks,
which were critical of attempts to piggyback Christian themes onto the
9/11 "truth" movement.
This Hammond took such offense, that he spewed obscenities all over
his posting and then demanded that I be moderated or banned, for my
"prejudice against Christians".

Look for a lot more of this in the future.
Truly "religion" (especially the "Christian" flavor) is going to be
used again and again and again ... as a COINTELPRO-style tactic, to do
exactly what you describe.

Along with the Urantia-style "New Agey" crap.
I hope we can come up with more effective ways of disarming this style
of manipulation.

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Giltner"
<bill.giltner@...> wrote:
>
> Wow. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
>
> News, even disappointing news, can be very useful to helping us all
> see who seems to be capable of standing up for justice.
> Alternatviely it shows who, for whatever reason, has lost their way,
> or is furtively opposed to justice.
>
> The hardest thing for me personally, being an atheist, is to know
> what to do with all the "activists" who put a Christian spin on any
> of the 9/11 truth movement. There seems to be such a huge number of
> people from David Icke to Bill Deagle to Alex Jones (I'm sure this
> is a tiny mention) that want to make this a God v. Devil issue. If
> I'm remembering correctly, Devvy Kidd comes from a Christian
> prospective. I just can't go there.
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable
> <webfairy@> wrote:
> >
> > I would never have guessed that Devvy Kidd would come on like a
> word I'd
> > have to moderate myself for.
> >
> > People were affected by Empty Hole 93 so we should pretend the
> hole
> > wasn't empty for their sake?
> > What a twisty rotgut form of logic~~
> > I don't think it's the least bit funny that they created a 15 foot
> > smoldering hole and tried to pretend a plane crashed in it.
> > The Mayor, one of the first people on the scene didn't see any
> sign of
> > any plane.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor1.htm
> > He did see FEMA guys there prematurely tho.
> > flash video:
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/mayor.htm
> >
> > A Reporter says there is nothing but a ten foot gash.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/hole.htm
> >
> > I had a friend visit there too.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/crimescene.htm
> > She says it's on the grounds of a secret base.
> >
> >
> > The Pentalawn page is a good natured factual accounting.
> > It has been picked up by
> > http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=8022
> >
> >
> > I would have thought better of Devvy Kidd. How disappointing that
> this
> > person thinks that humorless porkies are respectful, but a careful
> > accounting of common sense fact isn't?
> > http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
> > leads to a whole section that carefully documents this crime.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html
> > This is an intensely respectful memorial, but what it respects is
> truth.
> >
> > What is this world coming to that lying about how people died is
> > supposed to be a form of respect?
> >
> > It seems to me that those people's lives would be vindicated by
> the real
> > facts coming out.
> > THEY DIDN"T USE PLANES.
> > They used lies.
> > It is a good clue why this world is going down the tubes when
> somebody
> > with the previously fine reputation of Devvy Kidd starts
> advocating
> > lying as a form of politeness.
> >
> >
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Your Penta lawn presentation
> > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:40:55 -0800
> > From: devvyk@
> >
> > To: webfairy@
> >
> >
> >
> > http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html
> >
> > I don't know who to address this mail to, but I found your link
> off
> > Rense.com tonight.
> >
> > Your Penta Lawn presentation is in very poor taste. I am fully
> aware of
> > the fairy tale told by the criminals who run our government, but
> people
> > died in the Pentagon that day. Decent Americans who were guilty of
> > nothing more than going to work.
> >
> > Your sarcastic portrayal degrades and makes fun of a horrible,
> horrible
> > event and the cover up.
> >
> > I believe you would be better served to show some respect for
> those who
> > died that day. Can you imagine a father, son, wife, husband, son
> or
> > daughter who happens on this page and sees this mockery of that
> day? Can
> > you take a moment to think about how they would feel seeing how
> you are
> > making fun of something so horrible?
> >
> > To me, this is as tasteless as the web site that boasts "Find the
> > airplane" re Flight 93. I was in PA last summer and I can tell
> you, this
> > crash deeply affected the people who live in the surrounding area
> and
> > that web site that makes fun of "Find the Plane" "Let's Roll" It
> has
> > hurt a lof of those decent folks - people who had nothing to do
> with
> > Bush's policy making or anything else.
> >
> > If you want to be taken seriously, please change your presentation
> to
> > something professional and respectful of our dead fellow Americans
> while
> > getting your scientific point to the reader.
> >
> > Devvy Kidd
> >
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 15
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 12:31:01 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: [Fwd: [catapult] 9-11 to be subject of George Noory show tonite.]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [catapult] 9-11 to be subject of George Noory show tonite.
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:11:20 -0800
From: J. Austin <dogbonz@shoreline-wireless.com>
Reply-To: catapultthepropaganda@yahoogroups.com
To: undisclosed-recipients:;

I'm taping it.

David Ray Griffith, Morgan Reynolds and Dr. Jim
Fetzer discuss 9-11 tonite on coasttocoastam
tonite.

These guys are experts.

-oom

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 16
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 12:46:40 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: Gordon J. Ross and Hypersonic Flexwings

I found this googling Gordon J. Ross.
He recently made this excellent post capping off Gerard's Great Debate.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/01/332076.html?c=on#c142949
so I got curious

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~portwin/ASTRA/Waverider/flexwings7.html
<http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/%7Eportwin/ASTRA/Waverider/flexwings7.html>

HYPERSONIC FLEXWINGS
AS

ULTRALIGHT

WAVERIDER VEHICLES

A CONCEPTUAL STUDY

GORDON J. ROSS

Should you wish to contact the society or require general information
please contact ASTRA using the following Email address:

info@astra.org.uk

NB - Green numbers within brackets refer to references.

CONCLUSIONS.

It would appear from this preliminary study, that the application of
Flexwing technology to Hypersonic and Megasonic Waverider design, may
hold the key to the successful development of Waverider, as an enabling
technology for interplanetary exploration. The underlying simplicity of
the Flexwing structure, and its remarkable shape-changing abilities,
make the concept well worth further study. The enormous weight savings
and packageability available with these vehicles makes their use in the
future exploration of the planets a very attractive prospect. By
reducing the quantity of special materials required in the aircraft's
construction for a given mission, the cost of manufacture may be
drastically cut, permitting many such aircraft to be built; low-cost
test flights; lower launch costs; and perhaps even multiple-vehicle
missions to collect data from several different locations at once.

Since these "shape changers" can be either AGA vehicles, aerocapture
devices or manned reentry gliders, their potential for future missions
can only be guessed at. Some possibilities include shuttle and space
station escape vehicles, and low-cost cargo deliveries to Earth. A
Flexwing could be stored in the Space Shuttle cargo bay and mated to the
"escape ball" emergency crew person sphere to allow an emergency descent
to the Earth's surface.

Problems of heat transfer and carbon-cloth sail material will require
research and experimentation to solve, but the future of the Waverider
concept could be very exciting if this can be achieved.

The author would be interested to hear all comments and criticisms from
other researchers on this subject, and would be happy to discuss any
part of this paper with any interested party.

REFERENCES.

1. Morris Rasmussen, 'Analysis of Cone-Derived Waveriders, by Hypersonic
Disturbance Theory', "Proceedings of the 1st International Hypersonic
Waverider Symposium", NASA/University of Maryland, 1990. Back to Point 1
in Text

2. Douglas Tincher, 'Application of Viscous-Optimized Waverider
Technology for Evader Manoeuvring Reentry Vehicle and Hypersonic Glide
Vehicle Missions' , "Proceedings of the 1st International Hypersonic
Waverider Symposium", NASA/University of Maryland,1990. Back to Point 2
in Text

3. James E. Randolph, 'Enabling High Energy Interplanetary Trajectories
with Waveriders' , "Proceedings of the 1st International Hypersonic
Waverider Symposium", NASA/University of Maryland, 1990. Back to Point 3
in Text

4. Gordon J. Dick & Duncan Lunan, 'Amateurs' View of Waverider
Application', "Proceedings of the 1st International Hypersonic Waverider
Symposium", NASA/University of Maryland, 1990. Back to Point 4 in Text

5. Duncan Lunan et al, 'Report on ASTRA 1988 Waverider Conference',
Space report ,8,3,1-16, Association in Scotland to Research into
Astronautics, July 1988. Back to Point 5 in Text

6. L.H. Townend, "The Waverider", APECS Limited,1983. Back to Point 6 in
Text

7. Gordon J. Dick & Duncan Lunan, 'Flight in Non-Terrestrial
Atmospheres' , Asgard 2,4, Association in Scotland to Research into
Astronautics April 1992. Back to Point 7 in Text

8. 'Equations, Tables and Charts for Compressive Flow' , National
Advisory Committee on Aeronautics Report no. 1135. Back to Point 8 in Text

9. ' The Design of Practical Waveriders Is Made Possible Using a MDSSC
Hybrid Maryland Viscous-Optimized Technique' , McDonnell Douglas Space
Systems Company/University of Maryland Dept. of Aerospace Engineering,
June 1991.

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~portwin/ASTRA/Waverider/flexwings6.html
<http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/%7Eportwin/ASTRA/Waverider/flexwings6.html>

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 17
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:14:48 -0000
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: new anti-CD roach at DU

I set up a competing thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=
show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=72609&mesg_id=72609

"Why there were bombs planted at the WTC towers--"

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@...>
wrote:
>
> ...the battle of disinfo agents or -dupes isn't over... :(
>
> Why there were NO BOMBS planted at the
> WTC
> http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=
show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=72476&mesg_id=72476
> http://tinyurl.com/qdjeo
> Thu Feb-23-06 08:39 AM
> by benburch
>
> --
> DSL-Aktion wegen großer Nachfrage bis 28.2.2006 verlängert:
> GMX DSL-Flatrate 1 Jahr kostenlos* http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 18
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:16:10 -0000
From: "perpetualynquisitive" <perpetualynquisitive@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]

Update, just received comfirmation, those birds were part of
Al-Quail-Da's Martyrdom Battalion and those planes were targets of
Operation Mo'stinka.

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "alexldent" <alexldent@...>
wrote:
>
> But but but-- they were EXPLOSIVE birds!
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "perpetualynquisitive"
> <perpetualynquisitive@> wrote:
> >
> > Are you trying to say that airliner wings can't slice through steel
> > columns like a Ginsuï¿½ knife through ripe tomatoes?
> >
> > Behold the strength of airliner wings here
> >
>
<http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=planedamagedbybird097large1qx.j> > pg> and here
> > <http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=planedamagedbybird0984bq.jpg>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <webfairy@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Subject: Wing and tail stress limits
> > > Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:02:20 +1100
> > > From: Gerard Holmgren holmgren@
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The next time planehuggers talk about wings chopping down steel
> > support
> > > columns while still attached to a fuselage which is being turned
into
> > an
> > > accordion...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > For a plane to be allowed to be allowed to fly, aircraft engineers
> > > submit the plane's wings to load limit tests. The required
strength is
> > > 1.5 times the " maximum loads likely to experienced by the aircraft
> > > during normal service."
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/f> >
>
ocus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&c> > d=3
> >
>
><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/> >
>
focus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&> > cd=3>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "The airframer has been running load trials on a full scale A380
> > static
> > > test specimen in Toulouse since late 2004 (pictured below). *After
> > > completing "limit load" tests (ie the maximum loads likely to
> > > experienced by the aircraft during normal service), progressively
> > > greater loads have been applied to the specimen towards the required
> > 1.5
> > > times the limit load.* Engineers develop finite element models (FEM)
> > to
> > > calculate the load requirements.
> > >
> > > "The failure occurred last Tuesday between 1.45 and 1.5 times the
> > limit
> > > load at a point between the inboard and outboard engines," says
Airbus
> > > executive vice president engineering Alain Garcia. "This is
within 3%
> > of
> > > the 1.5 target, which shows the accuracy of the FEM." *He adds that
> > the
> > > ultimate load trial is an "extremely severe test during which a wing
> > > deflection of 7.4m (24.3ft) was recorded". "...*The European
Aviation
> > > Safety Agency (EASA) says that the maximum loading conditions are
> > > defined in the A380 certification basis. "The aircraft structure is
> > > analysed and tested to demonstrate that the structure can withstand
> > the
> > > maximum loads, including a factor of safety of 1.5. This process is
> > > ongoing and will be completed before type certification."
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > *Some videos of test crashes and actual crashes. Some don't clearly
> > show
> > > what happens to the structure of the plane but those which do
are the
> > > C130,the "hard landing" -- actually both of these were landings
which
> > > were successful but just too hard -- in one the tail falls off,
in the
> > > other wings snap off, when they touch the ground. I wasn't able
to see
> > > the Saab, because I don't have quick time.*
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > *http://www.alexisparkinn.com/aviation_videos.htm#TEST%20FLIGHTS*
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > *And how about the tail, which although now (somehow still )
connected
> > a
> > > fuselage which no longer existed, still managed to smash its way
> > through
> > > the building, even though the plane would have almost stopped by
now.*
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > *Remember Flight 587 ? The tail just fell off it.*
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > *Here is the official explanation. Of course, we all know that
587 is
> > > extremely suspicious, but if we are dealing with people who don't
> > > believe in Govt conspiracies at all, this puts them in the awkward
> > > position of having to either eject the official story of 587 (and
> > > therefore propose a cons;piracy) or else admit it as a valid
> > comparison, *
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> >
>
>*http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathwe> >
>
b/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct> > =clnk&cd=11
> >
>
><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/pathwe> >
>
b/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=au&ct> > =clnk&cd=11>
> > > *
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > The data recovered from American Airlines Flight 587 showed that the
> > > plane hit turbulence from a plane in front of it and seconds later,
> > > began to swing violently and *break* up before it fell 2,900 feet to
> > the
> > > ground, killing 265 people. The vertical *tail* of the plane,
and the
> > > rudder attached to it, were the first parts to *break* off, and
> > > investigators began to look early on at whether that caused the
crash,
> > > possibly because of some undetected flaw.
> > >
> > > But now, after extensive testing of the *tail*, they have found no
> > > pre-existing problem. And so they are intensely exploring
whether the
> > > pilots, in trying to correct and control the plane after the
> > turbulence,
> > > might have put more stress on the *tail* than it was designed to
> > handle.
> > >
> > > "A brand-new *tail* would have broken," said one investigator,
> > > underlining his belief that the effort by the pilots to control the
> > > plane set in motion the fatal series of events. Another investigator
> > > involved in the National Transportation Safety Board's inquiry
pointed
> > > out that it is possible to take an airplane in perfect condition and
> > > maneuver it into a breakup, just as a driver could take a
> > sport-utility
> > > vehicle in perfect condition and make a radical maneuver at high
speed
> > > that results in a rollover or other accident.
> > >
> > > The plane that crashed, an Airbus A300, is a long airplane - 177.5
> > feet
> > > - and with the fuselage acting like a long lever, sudden movements
> > from
> > > side to side produce powerful pressures at the end, where the
vertical
> > > *tail* sits. By international regulation, the *tail* is supposed
to be
> > > able to withstand a force 50 percent stronger than the largest it is
> > > likely to ever encounter, and Airbus officials said that the A300
> > *tail*
> > > exceeded even that standard. But investigators now believe that the
> > > *tail* was overstressed.
> > >
> > > Once again the international regulations give a 50 % headroom over
> > > normal flying stresses at the point at which it acceptable for a
tail
> > to
> > > break. And yet we had a tail attached to a destroyed fuselage,
> > smashing
> > > itself through a wall. Same at the pentagon.
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> >
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 19
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:22:30 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: [Fwd: [ctrl] ALERT: cited sources-Dubai's NYC Grand Central Station purchase]

This is only Flocco, but it would sure raise some eyebrows and
temperatures in New York if it accidentally turned out to be true!

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [ctrl] ALERT: cited sources-Dubai's NYC Grand Central Station
purchase
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 17:48:03 -0000
From: mary_in_orlando <mary_in_orlando@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: ctrl@yahoogroups.com
To: ctrl@yahoogroups.com

Cited sources: The New York Times
Washington Post
UK Guardian
CIA
General Hugh Shelton, former Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs-of-Staff

The Bush administration has given the same Dubai royal
family/government, state-owned owners of Dubai Ports World control
over the United States STRATEGIC SECURITY location of the Helmsley
building which straddles above the NYC Grand Central Terminal Complex
purchased just three months ago by Dubai government/state-owned
company Istithmar PJSC also run by executive chairman Sultan Ahmed bin
Sulayem.

See investigative journalist Tom Flocco's report:

Dubai's Grand Central Station purchase raises terrorism questions

Long-time Bush friend Robert Bass was lead investor in building sale
to UAE firm

The Bush administration and the House and Senate are not addressing
implications for a terrorist attack on New York City's Grand Central
Station, given United Arab Emirate (UAE) Dubai's multiple alleged
links to terrorism and the recent purchase of Gotham's Helmsley [also
known as the New York Central] building by a Dubai-based investment
firm owned by the Emirate's royal family.
READ MORE
http://www.tomflocco.com/fs/GrandCentralStation.htm

- - -

OrlandoMary:

Intercepted THREE (3) illegal Muslim Sham Marriage Rings in the
Orlando area PRIOR to 9/11 -- NO prosecutions! 'Muslim patsy sleeper
cells'?

ON-GOING extensive treasonous briberies and cover up conspiracies by
Bush White House, DOJ, OIG, FBI, DHS, INS, CIS, Congress and numerous
conspiratorial traitors in the LMSM of knowingly 'giving aid and
comfort' to illegal Muslims here in the U.S. threatening our national
security,

REWARDING illegal Muslims numerous felonies of sham marriages, illegal
overstay, illegal employment, perjury, bribery, forgery, fraudulent
documents, etc., with green cards and our highest privilege of United
States citizenship, providing easier travel on U.S. passports, voting
privileges and affording opportunities for federal employment with
access to classified information

-- PRIOR to and on-going AFTER 9/11 --

While, AT THE EXACT SAME TIME, these Bush, Clinton, PNAC,
Congressional traitors are ordering our own men and women in our
military to Iraq in mass genocide of over 126,000 innocent Iraqi men,
women, children and babies, to fight claimed 'seditious' Muslims over
NON-existent WMDs,

for the PNAC neo-con war mongers personal agendas, our military is
ordered to invade and occupy the sovereign nation of Iraq to fight
innocent Iraqis who:

-- did NOT attack the U.S. on 9/11
-- who have NEVER attacked the USA
-- who did NOT have WMDs

only for our American men and women to return in coffins or with arms,
legs, hands or feet blown off, bodies burned, and poisoned with radiation!

OrlandoMary
Court Adjudicated on 11/2000, 7/2002 and 3/2005
as an official Federal Whistleblower; illegally fired
after 31 years, without any compensation, for reporting
on-going extensive TREASON Briberies and Cover Up Conspiracies
Threatening our National Security, of 'aiding and abetting'
illegal Muslims here in the USA rewarding their numerous
felonies with green cards and United States citizenship
while our nation is in a 'proclaimed' war against seditious
Islamic terrorists
http://www.maryschneider.us

www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
ctrl is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, ctrl gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. ctrl gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

There are two list running, ctrl@yahoogroups and CTRL@listserv.aol.com, ctrl@yahoogroups has unlimited posting and is more for discussion. CTRL@listserv.aol.com is more for informational exchange and has limited posting abilities.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Omimited posting abilities.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Om
Yahoo! Groups Links

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 20
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:28:44 -0000
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re:02/20 NYC

Thanks-- I see what you are saying somewhat better, though it is still not
obvious to me.

You may not want to do this-- but what would be very helpful is if you could
take a missilegate frame and circle the things you think are UAVs.

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <webfairy@...>
wrote:
>
> Here's my perps:
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/uav
>
> I've got a couple missing links I've seen but can't put my finger on
> right now.
> One actually mentioned the ability to remote control a flock of drones.
> But that was long before I figured out that that is what I was seeing..
>
> At full speed, this is the part that looks like a "plane" with stubby wings
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/missilegate6.htm
> You can see that this effect is being generated in several different
> distinct places.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/066.htm
>
> The concentration of black is partially artifact. The Focus Magic also
> creates a sense of solitidy which is artifact also.
> If these pictures were "clear" then they would be fakes.
> This level of detail is never seen in cartoons, which are blobby and
> flatly colored.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/066.htm
>
> Since the crimescene footage shows several different objects creating
> several different explosions now, we can backtrack that it must have
> been several different objects previously as well.
>
> This group had some great photos of uavs including some near car size
> ones in the archives a couple months back. I need to hunt those too.
>
> Anybody who can help me with links about these small drones --who's
> existance did make MSM including in Wired Magazine -- I am grateful.
>
> Anybody who wants to learn to crack these images out of the Naudet DVD
> for themselves, I'm happy to teach folks how I did it. It's not hard and
> can be accomplished using free software.
>
> Just unfocus your eyes and chase away the urge to do a rosarch-blot
> style instant identification.
> The larger bulges are not the objects I am talking about. That part is
> the soon to explode clouds of explosive dust, which I believe to be
> aerosolized thermite.
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/haarp/beamweapon.htm
> The process is mentioned here.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> alexldent wrote:
> > Rosalee, with all due respect, could you explain or show more clearly how
> > you know that it is a flock of drones in the naudet video? This explanation
> > simply is not very clear to me and I supect to a lot of people as well.
> >
> >
> > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <
webfairy@>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> http://missilegate.com
> >>
> >> [[I unable to see the
> >> swarm of UAV's in the air?]]
> >>
> >> Do you see anything in the air?
> >> Do you see something moving?
> >> That's the swarm of drones flying in a close formation.
> >> They split up once they reach the corner of the building.
> >> At this point one seems to split off and stay on the roof while at least two
> >>
> > others come down the face of the building. Later we see the third building
> > dustpimples higher up on the building. There is also a white shiny
triangular
> > one that is persistant off to the side on both hits seen as a white triangle
> > shape. I expect this is the control center for zapping the drones around
like a
> > video game with real effects..
> >
> >> Most of these objects are around car size.
> >> You can't see something carsize clearly from that distance, especially
since
> >>
> > there seems to be some sort of electronic pulse going on that makes
things
> > fuzzy until after the explosion.
> >
> >> Look at the big picture of the flashframe on
> >> http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
> >>
> >> there is another showing which has disrupted the pattern of the flash in
the
> >>
> > lower righthand section of the flash.
> >
> >> Can you sorta see it?
> >>
> >> Thank you for questions I need to answer for my missilegate site.
> >>
> >> Jimmy Walters wrote me back, disappointed that it's all pictures and no
> >>
> > words.
> >
> >> It all seems so obvious that I can never figure out what to say.
> >> I am suprised what little skill paople have at observation.
> >> They can only see words programmed on their bellyscreens.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> malaprop wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
> >>> less.
> >>> It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
> >>> what
> >>> you would do if you was a perp."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure if some Maalox all around isn't called for, but I know
> >>> that putting one'self in the perp's shoes is one of the oldest methods
> >>> of working on a crime. Sort of a reverse engineering.
> >>>
> >>> On the subject at hand, you say the existance of these drones has even
> >>> be bragged about.......and while I can see 3 puffs on contact--which
> >>> could correspond to the 2 engines, nose--why am I unable to see the
> >>> swarm of UAV's in the air?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@>
> >>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:29 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Idjuts from the Frameup on Humanity are blind.
> >>> Even blinder than your average schnookiedupe who isn't much at
> >>> observation either, but when it comes to brainwashed perps, they see
> >>> STRICTLY what they are told to see. Things make no impression on
their
> >>> eyes. They live inside their own imagination.
> >>>
> >>> IF you don't believe I am blind and stupid as it's really you being,
> >>> knock yourself out of this dreamland where you think everything has to
> >>> be "rational' as in pre-thought and predigested.
> >>> You are making me think that you are a "Jesuit Adjudicator" --since it
> >>> was your comment that (choke choke) the vatican is not perps -- that
> >>> got
> >>> Captain May a high temperature roasting.
> >>>
> >>> Again, ALL perplings of what every faction are going to unite on the
> >>> FICTION that the first hit is animation. You might as well show your
> >>> face now.
> >>>
> >>> The missilegate frames are authentic and they show REAL CIA-style
> >>> drones
> >>> running in a pack and creating gray clouds of aerosolized thermite
> >>> explosions. The existance of these drones has been bragged about
> >>> even.
> >>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/uav
> >>>
> >>> I hate to pull an "expert" card, but I am an unparralled and unrivaled
> >>> expert in the study of the first hit footage. Yes, it can be and has
> >>> been faked.
> >>> Marcus Icke has extremely sophisticated techniques for turning the
> >>> drones and explosives into a "plane" to suit his own diabolical need
> >>> to
> >>> keep the ball in the air.
> >>> But at least he documented his techniques carefully, so we have a
> >>> clear
> >>> record of how images could be faked if they were.
> >>>
> >>> I can do hyper-enlargements of Marcus faked planes and see how they
> >>> stack up to the work known real.
> >>> heh!!
> >>>
> >>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
> >>> has one of marcus's so called "enhancements" that he palmed off on
> >>> SPINEless which were really only fanciful artwork.
> >>>
> >>> Marcus always concentrated on just a couple frames. He could never
> >>> reanimate his work.
> >>> My missilegate frames
> >>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
> >>> reanimate perfectly which is their Purity Seal that they haven't been
> >>> mucked with in any way foul.
> >>>
> >>> I've seen the pattern -- people cling to their (proudly) ininformed
> >>> opinion and act like the results of my four years careful analysis
> >>> means
> >>> less than their digestion.
> >>>
> >>> Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
> >>> less.
> >>> It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
> >>> what
> >>> you would do if you was a perp.
> >>>
> >>> The only thing changed about the missilegate frames is a few frames
> >>> were
> >>> nipped out from the thing-in-the-air and the things-in-front-of-the
> >>> building because the continuity from one frame to the next is broken,
> >>> but it is always the same formation of objects with subtle
> >>> differences,
> >>> no cookiecutter mode but different complex angles that could not be
> >>> modeled in.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> malaprop wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> No, of course I don't think your blind or stupid.
> >>>>
> >>>> But my mind has a mind of it's own, and insists on going trapesing
> >>>> from time to time, poking here and there. Right now it is
> >>>> juggling
> >>>> with them having a backup copy--just in case the real one revealed
> >>>> more than they wanted--finding it non-threatening decided on the
> >>>> real
> >>>> clip. But I think they had the ability to animate everything
> >>>> except
> >>>> the CD.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@>
> >>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 5:38 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I have been studying this footage close up and personal for four
> >>>> years
> >>>> and better now....
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you really think that I am so blind and stupid as to not be able
> >>>> to
> >>>> pick up IN FOUR YEARS OF CLOSE STUDY if the first hit imagery
was
> >>>> fake?
> >>>>
> >>>> The implicent insult to my intelligence, character and motivation
> >>>> tucked
> >>>> inside this particular craphead lie has managed to set off my anger
> >>>> repeatedly and alienate friends.
> >>>> I think I have learned my lesson now and will remain calm even tho I
> >>>> percieve your tubby idea is more insulting than the insult I
> >>>> moderated
> >>>> somebody for.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have known I need to put words to the Missilegate, and I wrote the
> >>>> words during a similarly distasteful session with Peter Meyer and
> >>>> Lynn
> >>>> which isn't posted anywhere yet, but does need to be posted as
> >>>> commentary to the missilegate frames.
> >>>>
> >>>> These are real, authentic, WAY WAY too detailed images to have
> >>>> originated as any form of animation or cartoon....
> >>>> http:://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig/beautyshots
> >>>> compare with the enlargements of the "tailfin" on the Pentagon Art
> >>>> Frames.
> >>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/multiframes.htm
> >>>> click any of the titles above the sets of pictures to be wisked away
> >>>> to
> >>>> commentary which links to enlargements of most sets of art frames.
> >>>>
> >>>> The Beautyshots are infinitely detailed.
> >>>> These are artistically enhanced enlargements at least 10,000 times
> >>>> enlarged and they still show subtle character.
> >>>> In the art frames, even a 300 percent enlargement of the "tailfin"
> >>>> equals flat characterless monocolor.
> >>>>
> >>>> No animation technique could do that.
> >>>> It took months or years to produce a version of the Pentagon Art
> >>>> Frames
> >>>> which could be animated for video.
> >>>>
> >>>> In the Missilegate Frames, The complex and peculiar nature of the
> >>>> images
> >>>> remains complex and peculiar no matter how they are dealt.
> >>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
> >>>> All the cartoons show a "plane" pushed along kind of like a rubber
> >>>> stamp.
> >>>> Not here:
> >>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/beautyshots
> >>>>
> >>>> Since it bothers me so bad, All the Anti_Webfairy types are going
> >>>> band
> >>>> together to pass off that those aren't really a flock of top secret
> >>>> drones, but a cartoon, just to keep the lies in play.
> >>>>
> >>>> It is real. It is a real snuff film.
> >>>> http:..911foreknowledge.com
> >>>> at most they have snipped out a few frames because there are
> >>>> continuity
> >>>> lapses.
> >>>> Whatever is there is set out to brag -- as the perps laugh cos you
> >>>> can
> >>>> wave this stuff in front of their face and you'd rather call me an
> >>>> incompetent liar than face that last straw that favors "rationality"
> >>>> over reason.
> >>>>
> >>>> If one thing is a cartoon, then everything is a cartoon is a very
> >>>> primitive logic pattern for which I have no respect. It's the sort
> >>>> of
> >>>> slimeballing I'd expect from Break For News.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> malaprop wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Yes, I am, as this is where I am at. With it being so risk-free to
> >>>>> use
> >>>>> pre-packaged video, why would they use the Naudet film of the
> >>>>> impact?
> >>>>> Taking it apart, it looks like the opening could have been shot on
> >>>>> a
> >>>>> Sunday or Labor Day--why would they have included an actual film
> >>>>> when
> >>>>> a fake would have been so much better, and would not have looked
> >>>>> like
> >>>>> possibly a missile? The smoke and fireball--how do we know that
> >>>>> wasn't artwork? So many of the clips of wtc2 do not match in
> >>>>> coloration--deliberately I suppose to make it look different
> >>>>> cameras,
> >>>>> rather than different forgers.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It was shown the next morning--could they have had two clips to
> >>>>> choose
> >>>>> from--one fake, one real? The whatchamacallits that are in the
> >>>>> sky,
> >>>>> could these be the mark of a whistleblower, unnoticed by
> >>>>> supervisors,
> >>>>> and only a researcher would discover?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The distance still should have enabled a clearer resolution than we
> >>>>> got. I just don't see these guys risking showing real clips.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.405themovie.com/download405.asp
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@>
> >>>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:20 PM
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Brilliant
> >>>>>
> >>>>> EXCEPT -- You seem to be lumping the first hit footage, which is
> >>>>> authentic snuff film -with the second hit cartoons.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> malaprop wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Alex, and all, you gotta change your perception.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We are not dealing with a government--that's their disguise. We
> >>>>>> are
> >>>>>> dealing with organized crime that took over the governement to
> >>>>>> facilitate their illegal operations, and to develop new ones. They
> >>>>>> do
> >>>>>> not care about duty honor country, and that goes for Congress, and
> >>>>>> a
> >>>>>> chunk of military brass. A ton of military retirements happened
> >>>>>> after
> >>>>>> 9/11, meaning the good ones left.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> CNN heads and other TV media are as guilty as the ones that
placed
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> bombs, and were in on the planning as was needed to synchronize
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> event. They had to be. I'm now of the opinion, or at least
> >>>>>> leaning
> >>>>>> that way, that ALL footage seen that day prior to the collapses
> >>>>>> was
> >>>>>> ready-made off the shelf, some impact shots were held back to
keep
> >>>>>> up
> >>>>>> a psychological fever pitch over a period of time. This was a
> >>>>>> script,
> >>>>>> and looking back I do not see them risking any snafus when
> >>>>>> deception
> >>>>>> is so easy. Even the "gashes" were pre-packaged, and only a
> >>>>>> resemblance was necessary thru bomb placement.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The only planes ever seen were those on the TV screen, and
anyone
> >>>>>> who
> >>>>>> suggested otherwise was ignored. The TV anchors reported what
> >>>>>> they
> >>>>>> saw on their monitors.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I feel that all the CNN people were over time replaced with
> >>>>>> hand-picked Bush/elite supporters. The last thing you want
> >>>>>> around
> >>>>>> you is someone who thinks and "gets it", so out they go. They may
> >>>>>> all
> >>>>>> Zionists, for that matter,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So that means that they will never allow let alone encourage the
> >>>>>> truth
> >>>>>> to come out about how CNN plotted against America.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>> From: "alexldent" <alexldent@>
> >>>>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:29 AM
> >>>>>> Subject: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A couple of thoughts:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1) not all of the media are perps. It seems like we should be
> >>>>>> able
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> get some
> >>>>>> decent-minded media types to turn on the bad guys.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2) a couple of years ago, there was hardly any talk of the WTC
> >>>>>> being
> >>>>>> blown
> >>>>>> up. Now demolition is all over the place and fairly widely
> >>>>>> accepted
> >>>>>> by 9/11
> >>>>>> skeptics. I predict in another year or two, video manipulation
> >>>>>> will
> >>>>>> just as
> >>>>>> widely accepted-- if we work at it. The important thing, the
> >>>>>> video
> >>>>>> fakery is so
> >>>>>> damn obvous once you know where to look.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Nico Haupt"
> >>>>>> <nicohaupt@>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> >>>>>>>> Von: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@>
> >>>>>>>> An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> >>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> >>>>>>>> Datum: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:59:12 -0600
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Maybe i just needed a refreshing pusher.
> >>>>>>> I will not give up yet :)
> >>>>>>> There is also still enough space to give the perps a hard time...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let's work on the 'prank' soon. I have now my tv team together.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ahem.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We've turned a corner on them, and suddenly you decide there's
> >>>>>>> nothing
> >>>>>>> left to do but pray, and we're too late and too small?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Heh.
> >>>>>>> Four years ago I figured there was nothing to do but pray cos we
> >>>>>>> were
> >>>>>>> too late and all there was was me - alone - having noticed there
> >>>>>>> was
> >>>>>>> no
> >>>>>>> plane at the first hit -- my first real clue how to dump the
> >>>>>>> whole
> >>>>>>> frameup.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Talk about asymmetrical odds!!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is four years and some later, and I am still alive, a fact
> >>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>> amazes me all by itself.
> >>>>>>> We've managed to drive the lemmings back from the cliff
numerous
> >>>>>>> times
> >>>>>>> while we work out how to release them from their lemming spell.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Now we are looking forward to a national tour
> >>>>>>> http://911bluestour.com/
> >>>>>>> To boogie our way to freedom.<<
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
> >>>>>>> NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 21
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:57:46 -0000
From: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Wing and tail stress limits]

Aha! I knew it! :)

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "perpetualynquisitive" <
perpetualynquisitive@...> wrote:
>
> Update, just received comfirmation, those birds were part of
> Al-Quail-Da's Martyrdom Battalion and those planes were targets of
> Operation Mo'stinka.
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "alexldent" <alexldent@>
> wrote:
> >
> > But but but-- they were EXPLOSIVE birds!
> >
> > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "perpetualynquisitive"
> > <perpetualynquisitive@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Are you trying to say that airliner wings can't slice through steel
> > > columns like a Ginsuï¿½ knife through ripe tomatoes?
> > >
> > > Behold the strength of airliner wings here
> > >
> >
> <http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=
planedamagedbybird097large1qx.j> > > pg> and here
> > > <http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=
planedamagedbybird0984bq.jpg>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <
webfairy@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > Subject: Wing and tail stress limits
> > > > Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 19:02:20 +1100
> > > > From: Gerard Holmgren holmgren@
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The next time planehuggers talk about wings chopping down steel
> > > support
> > > > columns while still attached to a fuselage which is being turned
> into
> > > an
> > > > accordion...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > For a plane to be allowed to be allowed to fly, aircraft engineers
> > > > submit the plane's wings to load limit tests. The required
> strength is
> > > > 1.5 times the " maximum loads likely to experienced by the aircraft
> > > > during normal service."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >http://72.14.207.104/search?q=
cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/f> > >
> >
> ocus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&ct=
clnk&c> > > d=3
> > >
> >
> ><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=
cache:S_JBoYIAq3IJ:www.freerepublic.com/> > >
> >
> focus/f-news/1579967/posts+Wing+root+break+breakage&hl=en&gl=au&
ct=clnk&> > > cd=3>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "The airframer has been running load trials on a full scale A380
> > > static
> > > > test specimen in Toulouse since late 2004 (pictured below). *After
> > > > completing "limit load" tests (ie the maximum loads likely to
> > > > experienced by the aircraft during normal service), progressively
> > > > greater loads have been applied to the specimen towards the required
> > > 1.5
> > > > times the limit load.* Engineers develop finite element models (FEM)
> > > to
> > > > calculate the load requirements.
> > > >
> > > > "The failure occurred last Tuesday between 1.45 and 1.5 times the
> > > limit
> > > > load at a point between the inboard and outboard engines," says
> Airbus
> > > > executive vice president engineering Alain Garcia. "This is
> within 3%
> > > of
> > > > the 1.5 target, which shows the accuracy of the FEM." *He adds that
> > > the
> > > > ultimate load trial is an "extremely severe test during which a wing
> > > > deflection of 7.4m (24.3ft) was recorded". "...*The European
> Aviation
> > > > Safety Agency (EASA) says that the maximum loading conditions are
> > > > defined in the A380 certification basis. "The aircraft structure is
> > > > analysed and tested to demonstrate that the structure can withstand
> > > the
> > > > maximum loads, including a factor of safety of 1.5. This process is
> > > > ongoing and will be completed before type certification."
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > *Some videos of test crashes and actual crashes. Some don't clearly
> > > show
> > > > what happens to the structure of the plane but those which do
> are the
> > > > C130,the "hard landing" -- actually both of these were landings
> which
> > > > were successful but just too hard -- in one the tail falls off,
> in the
> > > > other wings snap off, when they touch the ground. I wasn't able
> to see
> > > > the Saab, because I don't have quick time.*
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > *http://www.alexisparkinn.com/
aviation_videos.htm#TEST%20FLIGHTS*
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > *And how about the tail, which although now (somehow still )
> connected
> > > a
> > > > fuselage which no longer existed, still managed to smash its way
> > > through
> > > > the building, even though the plane would have almost stopped by
> now.*
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > *Remember Flight 587 ? The tail just fell off it.*
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > *Here is the official explanation. Of course, we all know that
> 587 is
> > > > extremely suspicious, but if we are dealing with people who don't
> > > > believe in Govt conspiracies at all, this puts them in the awkward
> > > > position of having to either eject the official story of 587 (and
> > > > therefore propose a cons;piracy) or else admit it as a valid
> > > comparison, *
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >*http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/
pathwe> > >
> >
> b/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=
au&ct> > > =clnk&cd=11
> > >
> >
> ><http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:8JpCxQiIkjcJ:www2.umdnj.edu/
pathwe> > >
> >
> b/autopsy/aaflight587.htm+Tail+section+break+tests+Boeing&hl=en&gl=
au&ct> > > =clnk&cd=11>
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > The data recovered from American Airlines Flight 587 showed that the
> > > > plane hit turbulence from a plane in front of it and seconds later,
> > > > began to swing violently and *break* up before it fell 2,900 feet to
> > > the
> > > > ground, killing 265 people. The vertical *tail* of the plane,
> and the
> > > > rudder attached to it, were the first parts to *break* off, and
> > > > investigators began to look early on at whether that caused the
> crash,
> > > > possibly because of some undetected flaw.
> > > >
> > > > But now, after extensive testing of the *tail*, they have found no
> > > > pre-existing problem. And so they are intensely exploring
> whether the
> > > > pilots, in trying to correct and control the plane after the
> > > turbulence,
> > > > might have put more stress on the *tail* than it was designed to
> > > handle.
> > > >
> > > > "A brand-new *tail* would have broken," said one investigator,
> > > > underlining his belief that the effort by the pilots to control the
> > > > plane set in motion the fatal series of events. Another investigator
> > > > involved in the National Transportation Safety Board's inquiry
> pointed
> > > > out that it is possible to take an airplane in perfect condition and
> > > > maneuver it into a breakup, just as a driver could take a
> > > sport-utility
> > > > vehicle in perfect condition and make a radical maneuver at high
> speed
> > > > that results in a rollover or other accident.
> > > >
> > > > The plane that crashed, an Airbus A300, is a long airplane - 177.5
> > > feet
> > > > - and with the fuselage acting like a long lever, sudden movements
> > > from
> > > > side to side produce powerful pressures at the end, where the
> vertical
> > > > *tail* sits. By international regulation, the *tail* is supposed
> to be
> > > > able to withstand a force 50 percent stronger than the largest it is
> > > > likely to ever encounter, and Airbus officials said that the A300
> > > *tail*
> > > > exceeded even that standard. But investigators now believe that the
> > > > *tail* was overstressed.
> > > >
> > > > Once again the international regulations give a 50 % headroom over
> > > > normal flying stresses at the point at which it acceptable for a
> tail
> > > to
> > > > break. And yet we had a tail attached to a destroyed fuselage,
> > > smashing
> > > > itself through a wall. Same at the pentagon.
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > > > * *
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 22
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:06:37 +0100 (MET)
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>
Subject: Different CNN audio dub 2nd hit?

Rosalee,

i rewatched some CNN "exclusive" 2nd hit clips again and was confused,
why one clip included now two dudes, bringing the "holy s**t" thing again.
I recall a different audio dub and not these dudes. Please advise.

Second crash into the World Trade Center.
javascript:new_vod('/video/us/2001/09/11/exclusive.crash.cnn.med.html')
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/day.video.09.html#11th

2nd link on left side from the top
("...Exclusive video of plane crashing into the World Trade Center (Sept.
11)..."

--
DSL-Aktion wegen großer Nachfrage bis 28.2.2006 verlängert:
GMX DSL-Flatrate 1 Jahr kostenlos* http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 23
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:30:48 -0600
From: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
Subject: Re: Different CNN audio dub 2nd hit?

This is a fake cartoon. Fake cartoons don't have soundtracks, so they
cobbled together something.
The audio does morph from clip to clip, but I'm not likely to be the one
hunting different versions.
Maybe Scott Loughrey knows which clips have different audio.

Nico Haupt wrote:
> Rosalee,
>
> i rewatched some CNN "exclusive" 2nd hit clips again and was confused,
> why one clip included now two dudes, bringing the "holy s**t" thing again.
> I recall a different audio dub and not these dudes. Please advise.
>
>
> Second crash into the World Trade Center.
> javascript:new_vod('/video/us/2001/09/11/exclusive.crash.cnn.med.html')
> http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/day.video.09.html#11th
>
> 2nd link on left side from the top
> ("...Exclusive video of plane crashing into the World Trade Center (Sept.
> 11)..."
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks-- I see what you are saying somewhat better, though it is still
> not
> obvious to me.
>
> You may not want to do this-- but what would be very helpful is if you
> could
> take a missilegate frame and circle the things you think are UAVs.
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <webfairy@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Here's my perps:
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/uav
> >
> > I've got a couple missing links I've seen but can't put my finger on
> > right now.
> > One actually mentioned the ability to remote control a flock of drones
> > But that was long before I figured out that that is what I was seeing.
> >
> > At full speed, this is the part that looks like a "plane" with
> stubby wings
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/missilegate6.htm
> > You can see that this effect is being generated in several different
> > distinct places.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/066.htm
> >
> > The concentration of black is partially artifact. The Focus Magic also
> > creates a sense of solitidy which is artifact also.
> > If these pictures were "clear" then they would be fakes.
> > This level of detail is never seen in cartoons, which are blobby and
> > flatly colored.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/066.htm
> >
> > Since the crimescene footage shows several different objects creating
> > several different explosions now, we can backtrack that it must have
> > been several different objects previously as well.
> >
> > This group had some great photos of uavs including some near car size
> > ones in the archives a couple months back. I need to hunt those too.
> >
> > Anybody who can help me with links about these small drones --who's
> > existance did make MSM including in Wired Magazine -- I am grateful.
> >
> > Anybody who wants to learn to crack these images out of the Naudet DVD
> > for themselves, I'm happy to teach folks how I did it. It's not hard
> and
> > can be accomplished using free software.
> >
> > Just unfocus your eyes and chase away the urge to do a rosarch-blot
> > style instant identification.
> > The larger bulges are not the objects I am talking about. That part is
> > the soon to explode clouds of explosive dust, which I believe to be
> > aerosolized thermite.
> > http://thewebfairy.com/911/haarp/beamweapon.htm
> > The process is mentioned here.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > alexldent wrote:
> > > Rosalee, with all due respect, could you explain or show more
> clearly how
> > > you know that it is a flock of drones in the naudet video? This
> explanation
> > > simply is not very clear to me and I supect to a lot of people as
> well.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable <
> webfairy@>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> http://missilegate.com
> > >>
> > >> [[I unable to see the
> > >> swarm of UAV's in the air?]]
> > >>
> > >> Do you see anything in the air?
> > >> Do you see something moving?
> > >> That's the swarm of drones flying in a close formation.
> > >> They split up once they reach the corner of the building.
> > >> At this point one seems to split off and stay on the roof while
> at least two
> > >>
> > > others come down the face of the building. Later we see the third
> building
> > > dustpimples higher up on the building. There is also a white shiny
> triangular
> > > one that is persistant off to the side on both hits seen as a
> white triangle
> > > shape. I expect this is the control center for zapping the drones
> around
> like a
> > > video game with real effects..
> > >
> > >> Most of these objects are around car size.
> > >> You can't see something carsize clearly from that distance,
> especially
> since
> > >>
> > > there seems to be some sort of electronic pulse going on that makes
> things
> > > fuzzy until after the explosion.
> > >
> > >> Look at the big picture of the flashframe on
> > >> http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
> > >>
> > >> there is another showing which has disrupted the pattern of the
> flash in
> the
> > >>
> > > lower righthand section of the flash.
> > >
> > >> Can you sorta see it?
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for questions I need to answer for my missilegate site.
> > >>
> > >> Jimmy Walters wrote me back, disappointed that it's all pictures
> and no
> > >>
> > > words.
> > >
> > >> It all seems so obvious that I can never figure out what to say.
> > >> I am suprised what little skill paople have at observation.
> > >> They can only see words programmed on their bellyscreens.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> malaprop wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> "Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
> > >>> less.
> > >>> It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
> > >>> what
> > >>> you would do if you was a perp."
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm not sure if some Maalox all around isn't called for, but I know
> > >>> that putting one'self in the perp's shoes is one of the oldest
> methods
> > >>> of working on a crime. Sort of a reverse engineering.
> > >>>
> > >>> On the subject at hand, you say the existance of these drones
> has even
> > >>> be bragged about.......and while I can see 3 puffs on
> contact--which
> > >>> could correspond to the 2 engines, nose--why am I unable to see the
> > >>> swarm of UAV's in the air?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@>
> > >>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 7:29 PM
> > >>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Idjuts from the Frameup on Humanity are blind.
> > >>> Even blinder than your average schnookiedupe who isn't much at
> > >>> observation either, but when it comes to brainwashed perps, they see
> > >>> STRICTLY what they are told to see. Things make no impression on
> their
> > >>> eyes. They live inside their own imagination.
> > >>>
> > >>> IF you don't believe I am blind and stupid as it's really you being,
> > >>> knock yourself out of this dreamland where you think everything
> has to
> > >>> be "rational' as in pre-thought and predigested.
> > >>> You are making me think that you are a "Jesuit Adjudicator"
> --since it
> > >>> was your comment that (choke choke) the vatican is not perps --
> that
> > >>> got
> > >>> Captain May a high temperature roasting.
> > >>>
> > >>> Again, ALL perplings of what every faction are going to unite on the
> > >>> FICTION that the first hit is animation. You might as well show your
> > >>> face now.
> > >>>
> > >>> The missilegate frames are authentic and they show REAL CIA-style
> > >>> drones
> > >>> running in a pack and creating gray clouds of aerosolized thermite
> > >>> explosions. The existance of these drones has been bragged about
> > >>> even.
> > >>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/uav
> > >>>
> > >>> I hate to pull an "expert" card, but I am an unparralled and
> unrivaled
> > >>> expert in the study of the first hit footage. Yes, it can be and has
> > >>> been faked.
> > >>> Marcus Icke has extremely sophisticated techniques for turning the
> > >>> drones and explosives into a "plane" to suit his own diabolical
> need
> > >>> to
> > >>> keep the ball in the air.
> > >>> But at least he documented his techniques carefully, so we have a
> > >>> clear
> > >>> record of how images could be faked if they were.
> > >>>
> > >>> I can do hyper-enlargements of Marcus faked planes and see how they
> > >>> stack up to the work known real.
> > >>> heh!!
> > >>>
> > >>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig
> > >>> has one of marcus's so called "enhancements" that he palmed off on
> > >>> SPINEless which were really only fanciful artwork.
> > >>>
> > >>> Marcus always concentrated on just a couple frames. He could never
> > >>> reanimate his work.
> > >>> My missilegate frames
> > >>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
> > >>> reanimate perfectly which is their Purity Seal that they haven't
> been
> > >>> mucked with in any way foul.
> > >>>
> > >>> I've seen the pattern -- people cling to their (proudly) ininformed
> > >>> opinion and act like the results of my four years careful analysis
> > >>> means
> > >>> less than their digestion.
> > >>>
> > >>> Clinging to that red herring would make me respect you less. A lot
> > >>> less.
> > >>> It isn't like we have time to waste on bellybutton contemplation of
> > >>> what
> > >>> you would do if you was a perp.
> > >>>
> > >>> The only thing changed about the missilegate frames is a few frames
> > >>> were
> > >>> nipped out from the thing-in-the-air and the things-in-front-of-the
> > >>> building because the continuity from one frame to the next is
> broken,
> > >>> but it is always the same formation of objects with subtle
> > >>> differences,
> > >>> no cookiecutter mode but different complex angles that could not be
> > >>> modeled in.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> malaprop wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> No, of course I don't think your blind or stupid.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> But my mind has a mind of it's own, and insists on going trapesing
> > >>>> from time to time, poking here and there. Right now it is
> > >>>> juggling
> > >>>> with them having a backup copy--just in case the real one revealed
> > >>>> more than they wanted--finding it non-threatening decided on the
> > >>>> real
> > >>>> clip. But I think they had the ability to animate everything
> > >>>> except
> > >>>> the CD.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@>
> > >>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 5:38 PM
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re:02/20 NYC
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I have been studying this footage close up and personal for four
> > >>>> years
> > >>>> and better now....
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Do you really think that I am so blind and stupid as to not be
> able
> > >>>> to
> > >>>> pick up IN FOUR YEARS OF CLOSE STUDY if the first hit imagery
> was
> > >>>> fake?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The implicent insult to my intelligence, character and motivation
> > >>>> tucked
> > >>>> inside this particular craphead lie has managed to set off my anger
> > >>>> repeatedly and alienate friends.
> > >>>> I think I have learned my lesson now and will remain calm even
> tho I
> > >>>> percieve your tubby idea is more insulting than the insult I
> > >>>> moderated
> > >>>> somebody for.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I have known I need to put words to the Missilegate, and I
> wrote the
> > >>>> words during a similarly distasteful session with Peter Meyer and
> > >>>> Lynn
> > >>>> which isn't posted anywhere yet, but does need to be posted as
> > >>>> commentary to the missilegate frames.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> These are real, authentic, WAY WAY too detailed images to have
> > >>>> originated as any form of animation or cartoon....
> > >>>> http:://thewebfairy.com/911/flyingpig/beautyshots
> > >>>> compare with the enlargements of the "tailfin" on the Pentagon Art
> > >>>> Frames.
> > >>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/multiframes.htm
> > >>>> click any of the titles above the sets of pictures to be wisked
> away
> > >>>> to
> > >>>> commentary which links to enlargements of most sets of art frames.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The Beautyshots are infinitely detailed.
> > >>>> These are artistically enhanced enlargements at least 10,000 times
> > >>>> enlarged and they still show subtle character.
> > >>>> In the art frames, even a 300 percent enlargement of the "tailfin"
> > >>>> equals flat characterless monocolor.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> No animation technique could do that.
> > >>>> It took months or years to produce a version of the Pentagon Art
> > >>>> Frames
> > >>>> which could be animated for video.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In the Missilegate Frames, The complex and peculiar nature of the
> > >>>> images
> > >>>> remains complex and peculiar no matter how they are dealt.
> > >>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/missilegate/video.htm
> > >>>> All the cartoons show a "plane" pushed along kind of like a rubber
> > >>>> stamp.
> > >>>> Not here:
> > >>>> http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/beautyshots
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Since it bothers me so bad, All the Anti_Webfairy types are going
> > >>>> band
> > >>>> together to pass off that those aren't really a flock of top secret
> > >>>> drones, but a cartoon, just to keep the lies in play.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It is real. It is a real snuff film.
> > >>>> http:..911foreknowledge.com
> > >>>> at most they have snipped out a few frames because there are
> > >>>> continuity
> > >>>> lapses.
> > >>>> Whatever is there is set out to brag -- as the perps laugh cos you
> > >>>> can
> > >>>> wave this stuff in front of their face and you'd rather call me an
> > >>>> incompetent liar than face that last straw that favors
> "rationality"
> > >>>> over reason.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If one thing is a cartoon, then everything is a cartoon is a very
> > >>>> primitive logic pattern for which I have no respect. It's the sort
> > >>>> of
> > >>>> slimeballing I'd expect from Break For News.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> malaprop wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Yes, I am, as this is where I am at. With it being so risk-free to
> > >>>>> use
> > >>>>> pre-packaged video, why would they use the Naudet film of the
> > >>>>> impact?
> > >>>>> Taking it apart, it looks like the opening could have been
> shot on
> > >>>>> a
> > >>>>> Sunday or Labor Day--why would they have included an actual film
> > >>>>> when
> > >>>>> a fake would have been so much better, and would not have looked
> > >>>>> like
> > >>>>> possibly a missile? The smoke and fireball--how do we know that
> > >>>>> wasn't artwork? So many of the clips of wtc2 do not match in
> > >>>>> coloration--deliberately I suppose to make it look different
> > >>>>> cameras,
> > >>>>> rather than different forgers.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It was shown the next morning--could they have had two clips to
> > >>>>> choose
> > >>>>> from--one fake, one real? The whatchamacallits that are in the
> > >>>>> sky,
> > >>>>> could these be the mark of a whistleblower, unnoticed by
> > >>>>> supervisors,
> > >>>>> and only a researcher would discover?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The distance still should have enabled a clearer resolution
> than we
> > >>>>> got. I just don't see these guys risking showing real clips.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> http://www.405themovie.com/download405.asp
> <http://www.405themovie.com/download405asp>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>>>> From: "Rosalee Grable" <webfairy@>
> > >>>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> > >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:20 PM
> > >>>>> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Brilliant
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> EXCEPT -- You seem to be lumping the first hit footage, which is
> > >>>>> authentic snuff film -with the second hit cartoons.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> malaprop wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Alex, and all, you gotta change your perception.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> We are not dealing with a government--that's their disguise. We
> > >>>>>> are
> > >>>>>> dealing with organized crime that took over the governement to
> > >>>>>> facilitate their illegal operations, and to develop new ones.
> They
> > >>>>>> do
> > >>>>>> not care about duty honor country, and that goes for
> Congress, and
> > >>>>>> a
> > >>>>>> chunk of military brass. A ton of military retirements happened
> > >>>>>> after
> > >>>>>> 9/11, meaning the good ones left.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> CNN heads and other TV media are as guilty as the ones that
> placed
> > >>>>>> the
> > >>>>>> bombs, and were in on the planning as was needed to synchronize
> > >>>>>> the
> > >>>>>> event. They had to be. I'm now of the opinion, or at least
> > >>>>>> leaning
> > >>>>>> that way, that ALL footage seen that day prior to the collapses
> > >>>>>> was
> > >>>>>> ready-made off the shelf, some impact shots were held back to
> keep
> > >>>>>> up
> > >>>>>> a psychological fever pitch over a period of time. This was a
> > >>>>>> script,
> > >>>>>> and looking back I do not see them risking any snafus when
> > >>>>>> deception
> > >>>>>> is so easy. Even the "gashes" were pre-packaged, and only a
> > >>>>>> resemblance was necessary thru bomb placement
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The only planes ever seen were those on the TV screen, and
> anyone
> > >>>>>> who
> > >>>>>> suggested otherwise was ignored. The TV anchors reported what
> > >>>>>> they
> > >>>>>> saw on their monitors.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I feel that all the CNN people were over time replaced with
> > >>>>>> hand-picked Bush/elite supporters. The last thing you want
> > >>>>>> around
> > >>>>>> you is someone who thinks and "gets it", so out they go.
> They may
> > >>>>>> all
> > >>>>>> Zionists, for that matter,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> So that means that they will never allow let alone encourage the
> > >>>>>> truth
> > >>>>>> to come out about how CNN plotted against America.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>>>>> From: "alexldent" <alexldent@>
> > >>>>>> To: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> > >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:29 AM
> > >>>>>> Subject: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> A couple of thoughts:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 1) not all of the media are perps. It seems like we should be
> > >>>>>> able
> > >>>>>> to
> > >>>>>> get some
> > >>>>>> decent-minded media types to turn on the bad guys.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 2) a couple of years ago, there was hardly any talk of the WTC
> > >>>>>> being
> > >>>>>> blown
> > >>>>>> up. Now demolition is all over the place and fairly widely
> > >>>>>> accepted
> > >>>>>> by 9/11
> > >>>>>> skeptics. I predict in another year or two, video manipulation
> > >>>>>> will
> > >>>>>> just as
> > >>>>>> widely accepted-- if we work at it. The important thing, the
> > >>>>>> video
> > >>>>>> fakery is so
> > >>>>>> damn obvous once you know where to look.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Nico Haupt"
> > >>>>>> <nicohaupt@>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> > >>>>>>>> Von: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@>
> > >>>>>>>> An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > >>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: 2/20 NYC
> > >>>>>>>> Datum: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:59:12 -0600
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Maybe i just needed a refreshing pusher.
> > >>>>>>> I will not give up yet :)
> > >>>>>>> There is also still enough space to give the perps a hard
> time...
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Let's work on the 'prank' soon. I have now my tv team together.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> ahem.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> We've turned a corner on them, and suddenly you decide there's
> > >>>>>>> nothing
> > >>>>>>> left to do but pray, and we're too late and too small?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Heh.
> > >>>>>>> Four years ago I figured there was nothing to do but pray cos we
> > >>>>>>> were
> > >>>>>>> too late and all there was was me - alone - having noticed there
> > >>>>>>> was
> > >>>>>>> no
> > >>>>>>> plane at the first hit -- my first real clue how to dump the
> > >>>>>>> whole
> > >>>>>>> frameup.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Talk about asymmetrical odds!!
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> It is four years and some later, and I am still alive, a fact
> > >>>>>>> that
> > >>>>>>> amazes me all by itself.
> > >>>>>>> We've managed to drive the lemmings back >from the cliff
> numerous
> > >>>>>>> times
> > >>>>>>> while we work out how to release them from their lemming spell.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Now we are looking forward to a national tour
> > >>>>>>> http://911bluestour.com/
> > >>>>>>> To boogie our way to freedom.<<
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>> Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
> > >>>>>>> NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie
> <http://wwwgmx.net/de/go/telefonie>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 24
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:06:18 -0000
From: "Bill Giltner" <bill.giltner@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Troll batlle of the century

I agree. Great work.

I do have a small question. Going forward, when debunking Pop.
Mechanics, is it really a good policy to use the Chertoff cousin
connection.

I saw how it was responed to here:

http://www.infidelguy.com/ftopic-10044-days0-orderasc-15.html

I don't for a moment say that the Pop. Mechanics article was
anything other than orchestated from a high 911 insider position.
However, I think the case for how it was orchestrated can be made by
pointing out how a huge amount of staff at PM was replaced prior to
the publication (and other issues like that). I find the cousin
thing, although likely true, gives off a smell of Flocco-like
stories...

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Nixon" <nxngrg@...>
wrote:
>
> Kudos to Gerard and Rosalee for some of the most enetertaining
> and enlightening troll trampling technique I have ever witnessed!
>
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/01/332076.html?c=all
>
> "Sky Cretin" and "Architect" are not your ordinary trolls indeed,
i
> think they are writing the playbook. I see the SAME approach in
ALL
> the other forums where trolls are trolling.
>

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 25
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:15:25 +0100 (MET)
From: "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@gmx.li>
Subject: Re: Different CNN audio dub 2nd hit?

> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Rosalee Grable <webfairy@thewebfairy.com>
> An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> Betreff: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Different CNN audio dub 2nd hit?
> Datum: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:30:48 -0600
>

okay, cool thx :)
so i was right, there are different audio dubs around...
I'm still hunting for complete first U.S.-CNN-broadcast from 8:45 to 9:15
without any interruption :(

maybe it's
here:
http://www.archive.org/download/911-Chronology-Source/911-Chronology-Source-Live-TV-Coverage-Split-Screen.mpeg
http://www.archive.org/details/911-Chronology-Source

>>>>This is a fake cartoon. Fake cartoons don't have soundtracks, so they
cobbled together something.
The audio does morph from clip to clip, but I'm not likely to be the one
hunting different versions.
Maybe Scott Loughrey knows which clips have different audio.

--
DSL-Aktion wegen großer Nachfrage bis 28.2.2006 verlängert:
GMX DSL-Flatrate 1 Jahr kostenlos* http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

[This message contained attachments]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911InsideJobbers/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911InsideJobbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion about 09/11/2001

Friday, February 24, 2006

[911InsideJobbers] Digest Number 397

No comments:

About Me

Last posts