9-11 box cutters 11 september utility knives

[David Morris]

I believe he was saying a single jet impact seems unlikely to be able to
accomplish a controlled demolition because controlled demo require costly
and precise engineering, which seems a reasonable thesis.  The implication
is that the WTC demo was thus likely an engineered demo, not from a jet
impact.

On Saturday, November 23, 2013, wrote:

> I'm sorry -- are you saying you're convinced this was a conspiracy?
>
>  In any case, aside from your bugaboos, I was responding to Tracy, who
> seemed to be suggesting (if I read him correctly) that, despite the
> horrific side effects, cascading buildings with jet fuel would be a viable
> means to demolish a building.  To wit:
>
>
>  If all it takes to bring the largest buildings in the world down perfectly on their own footprint is a single impact and some
> jet fuel, why are millions spent on the expertise and preparation needed for controlled demolitions?
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Clavey <antizoyd at yahoo.com>
> To: malignd <malignd at aol.com>; pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Fri, Nov 22, 2013 11:57 pm
> Subject: Re: 9-11 box cutters 11 september utility knives
>
>  Yeah, malignd, but They knew a perfectly controlled demolition wouldn't fool
> enough people so they had to "dirty" it up a bit so that thinking people like
> you would be misled. Duh.
> Rich
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "malignd at aol.com" <malignd at aol.com>
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 4:26 PM
> Subject: Re: 9-11 box cutters 11 september utility knives
>
>
>
> That would be so that half a dozen other buildings and a subway system wouldn't
> go with it, while rendering acre upon acre of surrounding geography unlivable
> and impairing the health and the dreams of untold thousands.
>
> If all it takes to bring the largest buildings
> in the world down perfectly on their own footprint is a single impact and some
> jet fuel, why are millions spent on the expertise and preparation needed for
> controlled demolitions.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
> To: P-list List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Thu, Nov 21, 2013 3:12 pm
> Subject: Re: 9-11 box cutters 11 september utility knives
>
>
> Mark, I don't say it ( SA article)is "conclusive" but the only "possible"
> explanation that remains after eliminating another explanation, not with
> evidence but simply presumption.  If all it takes to bring the largest buildings
>
> in the world down perfectly on their own footprint is a single impact and some
> jet fuel, why are millions spent on the expertise and preparation needed for
> controlled demolitions.   Maybe scientific American is right but it seems to me
> the argument works not by comparison to a competing hypothesis which has many
> examples, but by a presumption that those are inadmissible for consideration.
> All most people who have doubts want is a truly thorough publicly open
> investigation of the questions. There are just too many anomalies and extremely
> weird coincidences piled up here to dismiss as nutty conspiracy theories without
>
> such a procedure.  No planes intercepted
> no credible film of pentagon strike, too small a hole for 747, no engines. no
> defensive action of most defended building on earth
> Many firemen and other witnesses on scene heard and felt powerful explosions
> that don't match timeline of current narrative building 7 - no planes, no jet
> fuel, (several other comparable historic fires
> but no example of free fall collapse).
> no credible explanation for flight skills of terrorists . accounts of flight
> instructors describe complete incompetence.
> many insiders with financial motives, accrued power from event, and willingness
> to lie and commit mass killings
> thermitic materials recovered from site Personal. I admit that what is sought by
> those who question this story will
> never be taken seriously, for political reasons.  I have, in the past always
> advised truthers to pursue other avenues of change since this is a closed door.
> But I have also taken the time to look into their questions. Some folks  in this
>
> scene are  wacky gun nuts  who I dismiss out of hand, but there is a core of
> very troubling questions here that I  and many perfectly reasonable people
> including structural engineers, pilots, and first responders have found no
> satisfying account for.  Calling me wacky or dumb hurts my feelings  a little
> but doesn't really answer these questions. Apparently nobody in the mainstream
> media seems to think that such a thorough and reasoned and respectful
> presentation with an honest give and take of parties would be a worthwhile
> undertaking. If there is such a thing please tell me about it. We have a society
> where mass hallucination built around loud messages with scant
> evidence has become quite common and is a recurrent theme of our history:
> commies in all walks of life/McCarthyism,  Gulf of Tonkin/Vietnam, Weapons of
> Mass destruction/ Iraq war,  Iran nuclear weapons program/cripplin
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20131123/5b41b96f/attachment.html>