Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Kamaloca

Expand Messages
  • Frank Thomas Smith
    ... Ironically, Felt is not a Jew. Frank
    Message 1 of 36 , Jun 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Bradford:
      > 6/1/2005
      > Nixon in Hell:
      >
      > http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2005/06/nixon-in-hell-down-in-hell-
      > richard.html
      >
      > Nixon always suspected that W. Mark Felt, the second in command at
      > the FBI, was "Deep Throat." When it was all starting to fall apart,
      > Nixon stated so outright, according to one of those many tapes. And
      > when Haldeman told Nixon that Felt was Jewish, the ol' anti-Semite-
      > in-chief said, "Christ. [The bureau] put a Jew in there?... It could
      > be the Jewish thing. I don't know. It's always a possibility."

      Ironically, Felt is not a Jew.
      Frank
    • holderlin66
      Frank Thomas Smith wrote: Bradford, I know you consider me spiritual-scientifically retarded when it come to such things, but could you or Mr. Tang please
      Message 36 of 36 , Jun 9, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Frank Thomas Smith wrote:

        "Bradford, I know you consider me spiritual-scientifically retarded
        when it
        come to such things, but could you or Mr. Tang please advise exactly
        what
        the numerous and varied connections are.

        Thanks,
        Franziskus Retardus

        Additions to Michael Rain when posing the idea of Lodge murders we
        have a long list of lodge murders that were aimed at the whole
        Kennedy aspect of the the American psyche. Aimed at turning and
        quelling the Peace and Love movement which had the ability to
        approach the Etheric Christ and global brotherhood. Let in the crack
        and cocaine whores ole CIA and knock out some of the cult leaders of
        this global movement, because Sorath would not be able to step in
        with the current monsters in the Monkey Palace.

        But included in such a Lodge atrocities and Sorathian chess moves on
        The GrandChessBoard would be the horrific disaster and murder of
        some, near 3000 people just to start the ball rolling with the dawn
        of the 21st century, Armageddon, destruction of the full American
        psyche, media and meltdown of the american soul. And a patsy,
        puppet, spoiled psycho sitting in the middle of the monkey palace
        with the other chimps, as clueless as golf ball. His chart, with no
        Aries at all, reveals no interest in ideas or idea relationships at
        all. That would be GWB. But as Michael Rain would have it..further
        stunning proof, just for Frank.

        http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html

        "To explain the unanticipated free-fall collapses of the twin towers
        at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, mainstream experts
        (also see The American Professional Constructor, October 2004, pp.
        12–18) offer a three-stage argument: 1) an airplane impact weakened
        each structure, 2) an intense fire thermally weakened structural
        components that may have suffered damage to fireproofing materials,
        causing buckling failures, which, in turn, 3) allowed the upper
        floors to pancake onto the floors below.

        Many will nod their head, OK, that does it and go back to watching
        the NBA finals or whatever, but I find this theory just about as
        satisfying as the fantastic conspiracy theory that "19 young Arabs
        acting at the behest of Islamist extremists headquartered in distant
        Afghanistan" caused 9/11. The government's collapse theory is highly
        vulnerable on its own terms, but its blinkered narrowness and lack
        of breadth is the paramount defect unshared by its principal
        scientific rival – controlled demolition. Only professional
        demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated
        with the collapses of WTC 1 (North Tower), WTC 2 (South Tower), and
        the much-overlooked collapse of the 47-story WTC building 7 at 5:21
        pm on that fateful day.

        The scientific controversy over the initial structural weakening has
        two parts: what caused the original tower damage and did that
        damage "severely" weaken the structures? Photos show a stable,
        motionless North Tower (WTC 1) after the damage suffered at 8:46 am
        and the South Tower after its 9:03 am impact. If we focus on the
        North Tower, close examination of photos reveals arguably "minor"
        rather than "severe" damage in the North Tower and its perimeter
        columns.

        As many as 45 exterior columns between floors 94 and 98 on the
        northeast (impact) side of the North Tower were fractured –
        separated from each other – yet there is no direct evidence
        of "severe" structural weakening. None of the upper sections of the
        broken perimeter columns visibly sags or buckles toward its
        counterpart column below. We can infer this because of the aluminum
        covers on the columns: each seam uniformly aligns properly across
        the Tower, forming a horizontal "dashed line" in the façade from
        beveled end to end. Despite an impact hole, gaps in perimeter
        columns, and missing parts of floors 95–98 at the opening, the
        aluminum façade shows no evidence of vertical displacement in the
        columns, suggestive of little or no wider floor buckling at the
        perimeter.

        The aluminum covers attached to the columns also aligned vertically
        after impact, that is, separated columns continued to visually
        remain "plumb" (true vertical), lining up top to bottom around the
        aperture, implying no perceptible horizontal displacement of the
        columns. Photographic evidence for the northeast side of the North
        Tower showed no wider secondary structural impact beyond the opening
        itself. Of course, there was smoke pouring out of the upper floors.

        The fact that perimeter columns were not displaced suggests that the
        floors did not buckle or sag. Despite missing parts of floors 95–98,
        photos show no buckling or sag on other floors. If so, that boosts
        the likelihood that there was little damage to the core. Photos do
        not document what happened within the interior/core and no one was
        allowed to inspect and preserve relevant rubble before government
        authorities – primarily FEMA – had it quickly removed. Eyewitness
        testimony by those who escaped from inside the North Tower
        concerning core damage probably is unavailable.

        Photos do not allow us to peer far into the interior of the
        building; in fact the hole is black, with no flames visible. We know
        that the structural core and its steel was incredibly strong
        (claimed 600% redundancy) making it unlikely that the core
        was "severely" damaged at impact. There were 47 core columns
        connected to each other by steel beams within an overall rectangular
        core floor area of approximately 87 feet x 137 feet (26.5 m x 41.8
        m). Each column had a rectangular cross section of approximately 36"
        x 14" at the base (90 cm x 36 cm) with steel 4" thick all around
        (100 mm), tapering to ¼" (6 mm) thickness at the top. Each floor was
        also extremely strong (p. 26), a grid of steel, contrary to claims
        of a lightweight "truss" system.

        Those who support the official account like Thomas Eagar (p. 14),
        professor of materials engineering and engineering systems at MIT,
        usually argue that the collapse must be explained by the heat from
        the fires because the loss of loading-bearing capacity from the
        holes in the Towers was too small. The transfer of load would have
        been within the capacity of the towers. Since steel used in
        buildings must be able to bear five times its normal load, Eagar
        points out, the steel in the towers could have collapsed only if
        heated to the point where it "lost 80 percent of its strength, "
        around 1,300oF. Eagar believes that this is what happened, though
        the fires did not appear to be extensive and intense enough, quickly
        billowing black smoke and relatively few flames.

        While some experts claim that airliner impact severely weakened the
        entire structural system, evidence is lacking. The perimeters of
        floors 94–98 did not appear severely weakened, much less the entire
        structural system. The criminal code requires that crime scene
        evidence be saved for forensic analysis but FEMA had it destroyed
        before anyone could seriously investigate it. FEMA was in position
        to take command because it had arrived the day before the attacks at
        New York's Pier 29 to conduct a war game exercise, "Tripod II,"
        quite a coincidence. The authorities apparently considered the
        rubble quite valuable: New York City officials had every debris
        truck tracked on GPS and had one truck driver who took an
        unauthorized 1 ½ hour lunch fired.

        The preliminary NIST Response claims that "the wall section above
        the impact zone moved downward" (pdf, p. 36) on WTC 1 but offers no
        evidence. It offers photographic evidence, however, for a "hanging
        floor slab" on the 82d floor of the South Tower at 9:55 a.m. This
        looks minor though because there is no sag on adjacent floors and
        the integrity of the structure looks very much intact. The fire
        looks weak too, yet the South Tower collapsed only four minutes
        later. This would be quite a puzzle without a demolition theory.

        About a dozen of the fragmented ends of exterior columns in the
        North Tower hole were bent but the bends faced the "wrong way"
        because they pointed toward the outside of the Tower. This fact is
        troublesome for the official theory that a plane crash created the
        hole and subsequent explosion between floors 94 and 98. The laws of
        physics imply that a high-speed airplane with fuel-filled wings
        breaking through thin perimeter columns would deflect the shattered
        ends of the columns inward, if deflected in any direction, certainly
        not bend them outward toward the exterior.

        A possible response would be that, well, yes, an airliner crash
        would bend a column inward rather than outward, if bent at all, but
        the subsequent force of a jet fuel blast would act in the opposite
        direction: any inward bends caused by plane impact would straighten
        toward vertical or even reverse the bent steel columns toward the
        exterior under blast pressure. However, such a proposed
        steel "reversal theory" (first bend inward by collision, then bend
        outward by explosion) suffers two major handicaps:

        No "inward-bending columns" were observed and it would be unlikely
        that each and every one would be reversed by subsequent explosion,
        and

        the hypothesis is ad hoc and lacks simplicity, both scientific
        negatives.
        Occam's razor would suggest that the outward bends in the perimeter
        columns were caused by explosions from inside the tower rather than
        bends caused by airliner impact from outside. Also supporting this
        theory is the fact that the uniformly neat ends of the blown
        perimeter columns are consistent with the linear shaped charges
        demolition experts use to slice steel as thick as 10 inches. The
        hypothesis of linear shaped charges also explains the perfectly
        formed crosses found in the rubble (crucifix-shaped fragments of
        core column structures), as well as the rather-neatly shorn steel
        everywhere.

        The engineering establishment's theory has further difficulties. It
        is well-known that the hole in the west wing of the Pentagon, less
        than 18-foot diameter, was too small to accommodate a Boeing 757,
        but the North Tower's hole wasn't big enough for a Boeing 767
        either, the alleged widebody airliner used on AA Flight 11
        (officially tail number N334AA, FAA-listed as "destroyed"). A Boeing
        767 has a wingspan of 155' 1" (47.6 m) yet the maximum distance
        across the hole in the North Tower was about 115 feet (35 m), a hole
        undersized by some 40 feet or 26 percent. "The last few feet at the
        tips of the wings did not even break through the exterior columns,"
        comments Hufschmid (p. 27). But 20 feet on each wing? I'd call that
        a substantial difference, not "the last few feet," especially since
        aircraft impact holes tend to be three times the size of the
        aircraft, reflecting the fact that fuel-laden airliners flying into
        buildings send things smashing about in a big way. The small size of
        the holes in both towers casts doubt on the airliner-impact
        hypothesis and favors professional demolition again. There were no
        reports of plane parts, especially wings, shorn off in the collision
        and bounced to the ground on the northeast side of the tower, to my
        knowledge, though FEMA reported a few small pieces to the south at
        Church street (pp. 68–9) and atop WTC-5 to the east of WTC-1.

        Adding to the suspicious nature of the small aperture in WTC 1 is
        that some vertical gaps in the columns on the left side of the
        northeast hole were so short, probably less than three feet (p. 105)
        high (p. 27). Not much of a jumbo jet could pass through such an
        opening, especially since a fuel-laden plane would not minimize its
        frontal area. The engines are a special problem because each engine
        is enormous and dense, consisting mainly of tempered steel and
        weighing 24 to 28.5 tons, depending upon model. No engine was
        recovered in the rubble yet no hydrocarbon fire could possibly
        vaporize it.

        The hole in the North Tower also is suspicious because it did not
        even have a continuous opening at the perimeter, but instead
        contained substantial WTC material (p. 27) just left of center (pp.
        62, 105). This material appears integral to that area, so it did not
        move much, suggesting minimal displacement and no clean penetration
        by a jumbo jet. These huge airliners weigh 82 tons empty and have a
        maximum takeoff weight of up to 193 tons.

        In the case of the South Tower, an engine from UAL Flight 175 (tail
        number N612UA and FAA-registered as still valid!) has not been
        recovered despite the fact that the flight trajectory of the video
        plane implied that the right engine would miss the South Tower.
        Photos showing minor engine parts on the ground are unconvincing, to
        put it mildly. Perhaps independent jet engine experts (retired?) can
        testify to the contrary. Further contradicting the official account,
        the beveled edge of the southeast side of the south tower was
        completely intact upon initial impact. The government never produced
        a jet engine yet claimed it recovered the passport of alleged
        hijacker Satam al Suqami unharmed by a fiery crash and catastrophic
        collapse of the North Tower. The government has not produced voice
        (CVR) or flight data recorders (FDR) in the New York attack either,
        so-called black boxes, a fact unprecedented in the aviation history
        of major domestic crashes.

        Adding to the problems of the official theory is the fact that
        photos of the North Tower hole show no evidence of a plane either.
        There is no recognizable wreckage or plane parts at the immediate
        crash site. While the issue probably takes us too far afield, the
        landing wheel assembly that allegedly flew out of the North Tower
        and was found several streets away could easily have been planted by
        FEMA or other government agents. I've never seen any objective
        analysis of this wheel assembly though it would be welcome. In fact,
        the government has failed to produce significant wreckage from any
        of the four alleged airliners that fateful day. The familiar photo
        of the Flight 93 crash site in Pennsylvania (The 9/11 Commission
        Report, Ch. 9) shows no fuselage, engine or anything recognizable as
        a plane, just a smoking hole in the ground. Photographers reportedly
        were not allowed near the hole. Neither the FBI nor the National
        Transportation Safety Board have investigated or produced any report
        on the alleged airliner crashes..."
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.