Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Request for Critique from Group: Blog Post about Michael B. Green

> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: "ron_winn" <ron_winn@lineone.net>
> An: <911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com>
> Betreff: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Request for Critique from Group: Blog
> Post about Michael B. Green
> Datum: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:26:12 -0000

Ron,

we're still observing the effect of real witnesses vs. actor witnesses 4.3
years after. While supporter of the controlled demolition evidence allow
witness transcripts for their argument, they ignore other real witnesses who
saw no plane or if so, it had no windows. The witness, who saw a missile,
was whisked away from the FOX reporter.

After all, the 9/11 perps did know at that time the same what they do know
now: It's easier to control the spin of controlled demolition, but if it
comes to bluescreen tech on TV, they have only one tool: Sabotage and
Humilitating the supporters...

If one prefers just one scientific method, then we have to work with what we
have: analyse all videos (on CD + VR) and check it with physical laws and
inconsistencies.
Then you don't need any witnesses at all...

Remember that we also never needed any witnesses to make our case at the
pentagon. It was also just video 'evidence' plus physical evidence.

The witness confusion is a calculated tool which always can be used to
weaken our points. Therefore i would seperate them as an own entity and
exclude in specific expertises.

> Trying to sort out some of this "negligence" which was apparent on the
> day.You are including another group of "actors" [in both senses of the
word]
> and yet our argument is that there isn't the witnesses there should be to
> the two planes. There are many witnesses to bomb explosions at the towers.
> What have any actors contributed towards the official story at the towers?
No
> number of actors would have countered the mass of witnesses - those
> numbers of ordinary people who survived the attacks. You are also
increasing the
> number of people whose charactor would have to be assessed as not
thinking
> twice of supporting a mass slaughter of innocent people on 9/11 or
> suddenly becoming aware of the gig they thought was a drill going live and
very
> real. Need to be a damn good actor to play that part. Then being for
> evermore in fear of THEIR lives because of knowing too much.
>
> Do you really think that a totally domestic "war zone" would send F16's
> and F15's responding to an external threat scenario if there was no
> indicators pointing to an external threat?
>
> What are we talking about at the towers? Missiles, drones, mysterious orbs
> & helicopters. Not internal passenger flights. Not necessarily domestic
> situations are they? Afterall didn't the guy say "175" had no windows and
he
> hadn't seen anything like it flying in the States.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nico Haupt
> To: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: alexldent@yahoo.com
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 5:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Request for Critique from Group:
> Blog Post about Michael B. Green
>
>
> > --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> > Von: "alexldent" <alexldent@yahoo.com>
> > An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > Betreff: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Request for Critique from Group: Blog
> Post
> > about Michael B. Green
> > Datum: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 02:02:14 -0000
> >
>
>
> we figured, that some of the 'witnesses' could have been extras, coming
> from
> an actor payroll list of the naudet film crew, maybe "waiting" for their
> gig
> downtown and then easily confusing their gig with the 'reality',
> recalling
> it from their script.
>
> >>>>It seems #s 4 and 6 could have easily come afterwards, as part of a
> cover-up. But certainly the others were planned ahead of time. And
> that's why I don't get where Ron is coming from.
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Bill Giltner
> <bill.giltner@...> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not trying to change the subject here, and just ignore me if you
> want to
> > continue on the line of discussion that you are on.... but let's
> step back a
> > second.
> >
> > Elements of US based planning and execution include:
> > 1) "planted" witnesses to report on 9/11 to media to public and
> following<<<
>
> --
> Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
> NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie
>
> 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.
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> It seems #s 4 and 6 could have easily come afterwards, as part of a
> cover-up. But certainly the others were planned ahead of time. And
> that's why I don't get where Ron is coming from.
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Bill Giltner
> <bill.giltner@...> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not trying to change the subject here, and just ignore me if you
> want to
> > continue on the line of discussion that you are on.... but let's
> step back a
> > second.
> >
> > Elements of US based planning and execution include:
> > 1) "planted" witnesses to report on 9/11 to media to public and
> following
> > 2) planted videographers
> > 3) planted evidence (hijackers, hijacker password),
> > 4) other suspicious limited hang outs, e.g. Michael Moore
> Fahrenheit 911
> > 5) Insiders to assisted cover up in high places: Guiliani
> > 6) Clear anticipation of need to have the 911 Victims Fund to
> manage risk
> >
> > this is a tiny list of the whole
> >
> > Regardless of where the military grade weapons came from to do the
> attacks,
> > the idea that there would be any discussion about whether there is
> massive
> > participation by elements within the US is just offensive.
> >
> >
> > On 2/9/06, ron_winn <ron_winn@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > It's this word elements within that needs a definition. Many are
> naming
> > > the element within as people in the administration but there are
> of course
> > > other elements. Religious, political, military, environmentalists,
> business
> > > & criminal elements.
> > >
> > > Not only does the word terrorism need defining but inside job
> needs one
> > > too. A few have defined what they mean as an inside job. But other
> use an
> > > inside job to encompass all the above elements which only infers
> that that
> > > excludes those accused in the official story. It might help the
> "movement"
> > > if an "inside job" was defined. It might be more of a selling
> point if what
> > > was put to the people was "al Qaida didn't do 9/11. How could they
> when
> > > 67(?) times in the past smaller aircraft have been located in
> American
> > > skies and got themselves a fighter escort."
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >
> > > *From:* alexldent <alexldent@...>
> > > *To:* 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > > *Sent:* Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:39 PM
> > > *Subject:* [911InsideJobbers] Re: Request for Critique from Group:
> Blog
> > > Post about Michael B. Green
> > >
> > >
> > > You are touching on a fascinating idea-- that the navy shot the
> missiles
> > > that
> > > were used on 9/11 and the F16s were sent out to check out what the
> navy
> > > was doing (?)-- but I really don't follow your overall point.
> Maybe the
> > > problem
> > > is just semantics on what "inside job" means. What is your
> definition of
> > > "inside
> > > job"? Mine is simply that some elements of the USG were involved
> actively
> > > in
> > > the attacks.
> > >
> > > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "ron_winn" <ron_winn@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We know that F16's were sent out to sea which has never really
> been
> > > explained. In fact it seems such a stupid thing to do. Or else too
> > > obvious
> > > sending them on a wild goose chase as if to get them away from
> where they
> > > might hinder the "inside job". NORAD say that every defence system
> was
> > > pointing outwards towards an external threat. What forms of external
> > > threat is
> > > there? Well, many speak of missiles. Missiles have to be lauched
> from
> > > somewhere. Also why was the US Navy made ready soon after 9/11 was
> all
> > > but over? What was the Navy going to do that the airforce couldn't
> and
> > > apparently didn't on the day? The threats, we are told were purely
> > > domestic
> > > flights. The atc's, the FAA and all other agencies were
> concentrating of
> > > domestic flights. So NORAD sends out the F16's out to sea [and
> Lord knows
> > > where the F15's got to] sounds very stupid, right. Do you think
> the pilots
> > > would
> > > have been so silent if they knew they had been sent on a fools'
> errand?
> > > >
> > > > IMO F16's were not sent on a wild goose chase and the Navy
> wasn't made
> > > ready for a "domestic" inside job that was all but over. You can
> speak of
> > > missiles but they had to come in from somewhere. And F16's sent up
> must
> > > have been sent up with a purpose and that wasn't surely to get
> them out of
> > > the
> > > way. The threat was "in your face" domestic. The military are not
> dumb.
> > > That
> > > fits in too conveniently with the case of negligence that gets the
> admin
> > > off the
> > > hook. You think the airforce F16's would have done a "victory"
> flyover at
> > > the
> > > Pentagon if they had just come back from a wild goose chase.
> > > >
> > > > You see, it looks too obviously an inside job although that is
> not to
> > > say
> > > assistance had to be obtained from insiders. This goes to the
> point and
> > > the
> > > question - why if it was an purely an inside job wouldn't 767's
> >from their
> > >
> > > graveyard in the desert have been used. If they had we wouldn't be
> here
> > > today engaged in our search for the truth.
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: alexldent
> > > > To: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 3:04 AM
> > > > Subject: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Request for Critique from
> Group: Blog
> > > Post about Michael B. Green
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >>> I've never been convinced of an inside job although I have
> an open
> > > > mind.<<<
> > > >
> > > > Wha????? If it wasn't an inside job, what were they covering
> up?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "ron_winn" <ron_winn@>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Your link doesn't work.
> > > > > Unfortunately the other one does.
> > > > > Interesting statement because if two real 767's or
> substitutes were
> > > > in the plan then "11" would have been a scheduled flight. And
> so would
> > > > "77". Or both flights would have been reported to be private
> charters.
> > > > >
> > > > > Something flew into the north tower and to hastily cover up
> what it
> > > > was flight "11" was used.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've never been convinced of an inside job although I have
> an open
> > > > mind. So far there is enough to support a hasty cover up. The
> Pentagon
> > > > attack being the most speedily concocted one, I believe.
> Although 93
> > > > is running a close second.
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Bill Giltner
> > > > > To: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 7:19 PM
> > > > > Subject: [911InsideJobbers] Request for Critique from
> Group: Blog
> > > > Post about Michael B. Green
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Check out my blog post here:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > http://bgtruth.blogspot.com/2006/02/we-believe-that-senior-
> > > government.HTML
> > > > >
> > > > > Here's my main point:
> > > > >
> > > > > Additional Commentary by this Blogger:
> > > > >
> > > > > Where Dr. Green goes horribly wrong: (is this on purpose?)
> > > > >
> > > > > "To put matters plainly: any substitute plane would be an
> exact
> > > > duplicate of
> > > > > AA11 or UA175. To do anything else would be inviting
> disaster. "
> > > > >
> > > > > http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/green/loose_change.html
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > SPONSORED LINKS
> > > Government
>
>
procurement<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+procurement&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=S_3-2zVK9QQjTwxHvO91yw>
> Government
> > >
>
>
leasing<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+leasing&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=ZAuP_XFQBkNiVw-hPWWJ-Q>
> Government
> > > grants for
>
>
women<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+grants+for+women&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=R7KVvqXEVqN0Ct9WGPhKwg>
> Government
> > >
>
>
lease<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+lease&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=FM8lkJddvatAkQNo00D_Cw>
> Government
> > >
>
>
contract<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+contract&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=fTrsbvxC-m39UjtOdMcT-Q>
> Government
> > >
>
>
money<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+money&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=HB73LsQrRnXy-2WkBh3LyA>
> > > ------------------------------
> > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > >
> > >
> > > - Visit your group
> "911InsideJobbers<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911InsideJobbers>"
> > > on the web.
> > >
> > > - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > >
>
>
911InsideJobbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<911InsideJobbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>

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

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/