Sunday, February 12, 2006

Re: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Why Electromagnetic Weaponry & Not Planted Charges?

So what material was the antenna made of?
These pictures tell you what caused the towers to collapse.
Ask any physics professor. Conventional demolition, sheesh. 
Funny thing is many people know what brought the towers down. These guys, in the videos who know their metals know or should suspect. They won't say because they don't believe anything that would do that exists.
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 2:02 AM
Subject: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Why Electromagnetic Weaponry & Not Planted Charges?

Ok.  What I meant was why not just use, super powerful explosives? 
Conventional, but more powerful than normal, mini nukes even?  Seems
simple enough to me.

I just would not advise using any limited opportunity we have before
the press to talk about secret invisible microwave beams.  That
would be suicide and a definite PR victory for the September
criminals.  We need to be pushing "explosives cremating Americans
alive" and not these other issues like did a plane hit the tower or
not, or was there a pod on it etc.  Good issues to discuss and
investigate amongst ourselves (it definately needs to be done), BUT
SUICIDAL ISSUES to bring up in front of the press.  No press is
better than that kind of press.


--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, Rosalee Grable
<webfairy@...> wrote:
>
> I say they used everything but the kitchen sink, and maybe that
too.
> It was like the Kennedy assasination, when they had every single
> hit-team on the planet in Dallas that day.
> It was an excuse to keep people arguing this one or that one for
40
> years when the answer was "All of the Above."
>
> Every sentence that begins with "all of us know' needs to be
checked for
> accuracy.
>
> Nothing happens or is evident that the "collapse" in any way
mimics
> pancaking.
> Debris was thrown upward
> http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/projectile.avi
> 7 fell FASTER THAN FREEFALL THRU AIR
> http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%
20archive/911eyewitness_wtc7.wmv
>
> No "conventional" explosive could create the effects found in my
> h-effect directory.
> These are from the History Channel program "Relics from the Rubble"
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/h-effect
>
> "SIMPLE TASK" of making these massive buildings, designed to
withstand
> earthquakes and jet crashes turn to dust??
> http://thewebfairy.com/911/du1
> we knew more in 2003 than you know now.
> SIMPLE TASK???  Simple task. Cripes.
> In your imagination making two of the largest buildings in New
York
> crumple straight down into their own footprint was a "simple task."
>
> It is the direct evidence from video of the crime scene
>
>
> inphoman911 wrote:
> > All of us know that the controlled demolition of the Twin towers
was
> > designed to mimic a pancake theory collapse resulting from the
point
> > of impact of jetliners.  WTC7 was a conventional demolition
because
> > there was no jetliner crash to simulate.
> >
> >
> > Question #1. Why wouldn't the desigerns of the twin tower
demolition
> > use pre planted charges, just like they did in the case of WTC7
and
> > other conventional bottom 1st demolitions?  Why do you think
they
> > would want to use electromagnetic weaponry for the simple task
of
> > demolishing the twin towers?
> >
> >
> > Question #2.  Why was Firefighter, other 1st responder as well
as live
> > broadcast civillian eyewitness testimony consistent with
controlled
> > demolition resulting from conventional planted charges?  IOW,
why
> > would electromagnetic weaponry result in the "explosions" so
many
> > witnessed?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

SPONSORED LINKS
Government procurement Government leasing Government grants for women
Government lease Government contract Government money

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)