[911InsideJobbers] Re: Controlled Demolition Limited Hangout?]

Even more absurd-- the cockpit of flight 93 officially SHATTERED on
the ground BEFORE the rest of the plane was swallowed into the "soft"
earth.

This is one of the greatest contradictions in 9/11, IMO. That flight
93 exploded on soft ground on got swallowed by the same dirt, but all
other three planes easily penetrated heavy building walls.

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "ron_winn" <ron_winn@...> wrote:
>
> True. It size of the explosion can be judged by the width of the
wall, at least how wide the explosion was. Hey, just ocurred to me.
They say the wings of "77" went forward on impact. None of the wings
went forward of the "767's". Even though in all cases, of course the
wings/fixtures are the same and so is the cockpits. So all three had
nose impacts yet the "767's" didn't go forward. Didn't even go back
either.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: alexldent
> To: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 4:30 PM
> Subject: [Fwd: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Controlled Demolition
Limited Hangout?]
>
>
> You're totally right about how empty (of any plane parts) that hole in
> the north tower is. It is very suspicious. But in the Naudet video,
> there was a fairly significant fireball after the first hit. Just
> that we only have that one shot and one angle to see it from, and the
> camerawork is not great.
>
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "ron_winn" <ron_winn@> wrote:
> >
> > I believe "11" should be the centre of attention which people may
> take to rather than the non- existent "175" because that 155' long
> plane went straight into the centre core of the north tower and none
> of it can be seen around the hole which the videos all zoom into. And
> even a woman stands at the hole which she couldn't have done if 155'
> of aluminium plane was burning in this area because of the toxic fumes
> being given off and of course flames which can't be seen either. What
> is the distance between the outer wall and the core? A tail end should
> have been seen somewhere inside around that hole. And how dramatic the
> explosion created by "175" into the atmosphere is not seen with "11".
> If a similar explosion ocurred inside the north tower how come it was
> contained within the building. Why wasn't there a dramatic scene after
> "11" penetrated the wall?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: perpetualynquisitive
> > To: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 6:46 AM
> > Subject: SV: [Fwd: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Controlled Demolition
> Limited Hangout?]
> >
> >
> > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Peter Kofod <slashkofod@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree with alex here.
> > > To just step in front of a camera and say "no planehit the
> towers" would be idiotic. But if someone would care to presentan
> hardhitting and easy-to-understand overview of the argument, itwould
> be a totally different case.
> > >
> > > Personally I would avoid terms like butterplanes andwhatitz,
> since my PERSONAL experience is, that these terms make peopleNOT want
> to look at the evidence, just like screaming IDIOT at someone,probably
> isn´t the best way to make them consider your point, but Iguess this
> is a matter of taste?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Peter Kofod, Denmark
> > >
> > > alexldent <alexldent@> skrev:
> > > Obviously I'm not Rosalee, and you asked her-- but, I wouldn't
> mind if
> > > he did this and backed it up with a proper analysis. If you
> just SAY
> > > that "there was no plane crash and that the planes hitting the
> towers
> > > were faked" of course it sounds crazy. But if one presented it
> > > properly, I think it could be a very effective argument.
The more I
> > > look at these pictures of the WTC and the planes and then the
> > > plane-shaped holes, the more bogus it looks.
> > >
> > > The truth is the truth, and I don't like the idea of hiding the
> truth,
> > > no matter how crazy it might initially sound.
> > >
> > > > Do you really want Professor Jones to
> > > > go on national TV and say that there was no plane crash and
> that the
> > > > planes hitting the towers were faked and edited in later on
> > > > videotape? What praytell would be the result of him
taking that
> > > > action? What good would it do our truth movement if people of
> Jones
> > > > stature started doing things like that?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > SPONSORED LINKS
> > > Governmentprocurement Government leasing
> Governmentgrants for women Government lease Government contract
> Government money
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > >
> > >
> > > Visit your group "911InsideJobbers" on the web.
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > 911InsideJobbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > >
> > We may have such a presentation available soon. I have been
> working ona 9/11 presentation, for more than 2 years, that exclusively
> covers theno-plane "theory". Thus far I have been able to show parts
> of it to people that were believers of the Official Fairy Tale and to
> date NOT one person that I went over the material with disagreed with
> my perspective afterwards. 100% conversion rate. Keep in mind this was
> done on a one-on-one basis with people that know me, but the results
> are encouraging.
> >
> > In the coming weeks (hopefully by April) I will make the
> presentationavailable for others to review, debunk, toss out the
> window, etc.
> >
> > For now, I will give you the title of the presentation:
> >
> >
> > 9/11:
> > Collusion
> > Illusion
> > Delusion.
> >
> >
> > Collusion is the planning of 9/11 (including memes for alternative
> scenarios).
> > Illusion is the actual attack and coverage.
> > Delusion is the inability of the public to see through the
deception.
> >
> >
> > FWIW, back in December 2001, I aired my perspective about
> no-planes to several friends, it sailed about as smooth as the
> Titanic. Many of those people would not even speak to me for several
> months afterwards,a couple still won't (and refuse to hear my
> presentation as well), but the rest have since become convinced that
> the no-plane perspective is closer to what really occurred that
> morning than any other analysis.
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS Government procurement Government leasing
> Government grants for women
> > Government lease Government contract Government money
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > a.. Visit your group "911InsideJobbers" on the web.
> >
> > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > 911InsideJobbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS Government procurement Government leasing
Government grants for women
> Government lease Government contract Government money
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> a.. Visit your group "911InsideJobbers" on the web.
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> 911InsideJobbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

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/