(and Jim Fetzer & Gordon "Veterans Today" Duff ... along with
(Read bottom up)
-------- Original Message --------
I assume you will all accept that the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology is considered to be one of
the finest institutes of its kind in the world
Well ... I don't ... that's for sure.
What I consider about MIT is that it is OBVIOUSLY a shell
organisation for the CIA.
And anyone, connected with MIT, who actually TRIES to put forward
the Truth is ... 'eliminated' ... such as Dr. Eugene Mallove
(chief science writer at MIT's news office).
Conventional science and scientists hold
that the twin towers virtually disappeared b/c of kerosene and
So ... if I were to light a kerosene stove (according to MIT), it
would melt & disappear into it's own footprint?
And ... if 'jet fuel' can vapourise a 757/767 ... then that must
mean (according to MIT), then when the Captain switches on the jet
engines ... they vapourise.
I have an option on some seafront property in Switzerland ...
would anyone at MIT be interested?
On 11/12/13 4:34 pm, Morgan Reynolds
Naturally I will look at this link. But here is my
1. Conventional science and scientists hold that the
twin towers virtually disappeared b/c of kerosene and
office fires despite the physical impossibility of such an
event. Where did the 110 floors from each tower stack
up? Nowhere b/c they were mostly Blowin’ in the wind as
Bob Dylan would sing. So much for establishment science
and its prestige—BOGUS. Prestige is for people who cannot
think for themselves. That ain’t me, buddy. MIT is
dependent on the MIC for much of its funding, or don’t you
know this? In a crunch, its administrators and scientists
salute whom? The truth or their paymaster, the serial
liars called the government? This question nearly answers
itself, doesn’t it? Reread Dwight D. Eisenhower’s
farewell address if you are still stumped.
2. Oh, four alleged 767/757 airliner crashed on 9/11
2001!? Really? Where’s the evidence? My objections to
this lie are nearly endless but let’s begin with aluminum
airliners disappearing into steel/concrete towers in
violation of Newton’s third law (‘equal and opposite’)?
BS. Towers much weaker than airliners? Bull. And you
can’t show me one 40’-tall tail section post-crash? Let
me spell it out this time: BULLSHIT. The tail section
snaps off in most airliner crashes b/c it’s a lot of size
and weight placed at the end of a long if not strong
aluminum air frame. Real simple physics, Anthony. For a
recent example, check out this Asiana flight 214 crash in
which the tail separates immediately even though the
collision with the ground is far from head on. And on
9/11 all alleged airliner crashes left no separated tail
sections? Not one!? Nor any connected to a fuselage!
That’s impossible so there must have been some MIC magic
in that old silk hat on 9/11 ... http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/passengers-and-witnesses-recall-asiana-crash/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/07/video-of-asiana-crash_n_3558524.html http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/asiana-airlines-crash-seconds-horror-flight-214-19612468
There was a better amateur video of the Asiana 214 crash
than Fred Hayes’ but I can’t locate it now. Here is what
happened near where I live at the Little Rock airport when
a plane overran the runway and hit a little bit of steel
(cable and landing lights, June 1999): http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/aa1420/5.shtml
Texas A&M University
P.S. Anthony, aren’t
you impressed by my Prestige? I’ve got letters
after my name. Convincing of...what exactly? Well,
you’re right, prestige is ‘the second-hander’s
delusion,’ ‘the desire for unearned greatness’ (Ayn
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 12:33
Subject: WTC Aircraft Impact Damage
Professor of Applied Mechanics, MIT
I assume you will all accept that the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology is considered to be one of the
finest institutes of its kind in the world, so you
would have a hard time convincing the author of this
article that the videos showing the impacts of the two
aircraft that hit the World Trade Center on September
11the, 2001 were faked, in some way. But I would be
fascinated to see you try, on one or other of your
Only fools believe what they are told, when it is
clear that much else is being hidden.