Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.conspiracy > #270933 > unrolled thread

The great 9/11 mystery has been solved

Back to article view | Back to alt.conspiracy

Contents

  The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-11 16:40 -0600
    Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-11 23:21 +0000
      Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-12 10:00 -0600
        Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-12 18:16 +0000
          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-15 01:26 -0800
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 04:23 -0600
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 06:00 -0500
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 06:46 -0600
          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-15 09:41 -0600
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-16 01:55 +0000
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-15 20:46 -0600
                Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-16 16:06 +0000
    Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-11-11 15:28 -0800
      Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-12 21:24 +0000
    Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved edrhodes@hotmail.com - 2015-11-13 19:12 -0800
      Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-14 21:16 +0100
        Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved edrhodes@hotmail.com - 2015-11-14 19:41 -0800
          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-15 05:31 +0100
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-15 05:46 +0100
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-15 17:37 -0600
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 04:21 -0600
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-15 21:47 +0100
                Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 17:45 -0600
                  Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-15 18:43 -0600
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-15 22:55 +0000
                Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-15 17:15 -0600
                  Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-16 19:17 +0000
                    Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-16 13:37 -0600
                      Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-16 21:36 +0000
                        Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-16 15:56 -0600
                          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-17 16:57 +0000
                            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-30 06:50 -0800
                              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-30 08:05 -0800
                              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-11-30 11:21 -0500
                                Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-01 09:31 -0800
                                  Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 -0500
                                  Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 04:34 -0600
                                  Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-02 18:12 -0800
                                    Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-03 04:12 -0600
                                    Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-12-03 10:30 -0500
                              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-11-30 16:46 +0000
                        Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-17 05:03 +0100
          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved joeturn <joeturn2@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-01 10:34 -0800
        Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-11-15 17:28 -0600
        Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved joeturn <joeturn2@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-01 10:46 -0800
          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved joeturn <joeturn2@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-01 10:52 -0800
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved edrhodes@hotmail.com - 2015-12-02 05:29 -0800
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-02 15:12 +0000
                Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved edrhodes@hotmail.com - 2015-12-02 19:35 -0800
          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 07:04 +1100
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-01 20:21 +0000
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 04:34 -0600
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-12-02 05:51 -0500
                Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 16:13 -0600
              Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-12-03 07:43 +1100
                Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 16:13 -0600
          Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-01 20:21 +0000
            Re: The great 9/11 mystery has been solved "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 04:34 -0600

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#271050

On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 05:31:16 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
wrote:

>Am 15.11.2015 04:41, schrieb edrhodes@hotmail.com:
>>> But actually I don't believe the use of atomic bombs at all, since we
>>> >  see a pattern of destruction, that is more like the 'Philadelphia
>>> >  experiment'. And this was actually kind of 'time machine'.
>>> >
>>> >  So: where did the towers go???
>> They broke apart and were scattered across the plaza.
>
>This is not true.
>

     Most of the buildings did end up in the "bath tub." But in
essence, Ed is correct.

>A building consists of about 10% of its volume from hard materials and 
>90% air.
>
>So a rough calculation would reveal, there was MUCH too little debris 
>left behind.
>

     Huh? 

>One tower was 400m (roughly) high and had about 100 floors.
>
>Ten percent makes a pile of ten floors or 40 m.
>
>But found were less than the hight of the main lobby.
>

     Because most of the debris was found in the "bath tub." This is
very old news.

>The main lobby is easy to identify by the characteristic form of the 
>perimeter columns.
>
>It had a hight of about four usual floors.
>
>So: two thirds of the debris went missing.
>

     Do you really think lying, when you know Ed knows the truth, is a
benefit?

>If you don't regard this as suspicious, this would be something you 
>should worry about.

     No rational person will regard your lying as a cause for
suspicion. 
     And yes, you are lying since by this point you'll know the truth.
You aren't stupid, so you can't blame a lack of intellect.

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271064

Am 15.11.2015 11:21, schrieb K Wills (Shill #3):
>>>> But actually I don't believe the use of atomic bombs at all, since we
>>>>> >>>  >    see a pattern of destruction, that is more like the 'Philadelphia
>>>>> >>>  >    experiment'. And this was actually kind of 'time machine'.
>>>>> >>>  >
>>>>> >>>  >    So: where did the towers go???
>>> >>  They broke apart and were scattered across the plaza.
>> >
>> >This is not true.
>> >
>       Most of the buildings did end up in the "bath tub." But in
> essence, Ed is correct.
>

This is also not true.

The basement of the WTC complex remained almost intact, hence the debris 
did not fill the so called 'bath tub'.

(This was actually one of the 'mysteries' of 9/11.)

E.g. the PATH train was still standing in the WTC station and was almost 
intact:
http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2014/06/25/11946186/GARY.Suson.PATH.subway.GroundZeroMuseum.jpg

There is - of course - a lot of debris visible. But by no means as much 
as would be expected, if the entire WTC 1 building was lying there in 
pieces.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271090

On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 21:47:30 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
wrote:

>Am 15.11.2015 11:21, schrieb K Wills (Shill #3):
>>>>> But actually I don't believe the use of atomic bombs at all, since we
>>>>>> >>>  >    see a pattern of destruction, that is more like the 'Philadelphia
>>>>>> >>>  >    experiment'. And this was actually kind of 'time machine'.
>>>>>> >>>  >
>>>>>> >>>  >    So: where did the towers go???
>>>> >>  They broke apart and were scattered across the plaza.
>>> >
>>> >This is not true.
>>> >
>>       Most of the buildings did end up in the "bath tub." But in
>> essence, Ed is correct.
>
>This is also not true.
>

     Do you honestly think your denying of the truth works?

>The basement of the WTC complex remained almost intact, hence the debris 
>did not fill the so called 'bath tub'.
>

     I didn't comment about the basement. Your dishonest (read: LIE)
that I did is exposed.

>(This was actually one of the 'mysteries' of 9/11.)
>

     It's no mystery. But you have proved, many times, reality is
something you don't like.

>E.g. the PATH train was still standing in the WTC station and was almost 
>intact:
>http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2014/06/25/11946186/GARY.Suson.PATH.subway.GroundZeroMuseum.jpg
>

     And where was the station in relation to the towers? Roughly a
block away.
     Oops. Reality just contradicted you. 

>There is - of course - a lot of debris visible. But by no means as much 
>as would be expected, if the entire WTC 1 building was lying there in 
>pieces.

     It wasn't  any less than expected. As has been proved, many times
in this very group, all of the debris was accounted for. You may LIE
as often as you need, but reality will always contradict you.

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271099

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:216i4btolaim3b6m6hv8tskv9gegs9n8ka@4ax.com...
>
>     It wasn't  any less than expected.

ROTFLMAO because you can't prove that.  BTW you have never even proven what 
percentage of a building is normally left behind from a controlled 
demolition or a "global collapse" for that matter.

But in the case of the Twin Towers you have failed to prove why one side of 
them is all the way down to the ground and the other side is/was 8 floors 
high with the Survivors being trapped in staircase B of the North Tower that 
was 6 floors high and closer to the surviving corner than the completey 
vaporized corner.  See:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

> As has been proved, many times
> in this very group, all of the debris was accounted for.

ROTFLMAO because that bullshit is just like that bullshit about over 90% of 
Flight 93 being accounted for when photos of Pranksville, PA show less than 
.09% of a 757 crashed there and possibly no 757 crashed there.

And if we saw a 757 crash at Pranksville, PA it would be just like the 767s 
that flew into the Twin Towers where they actually disappeared before they 
got into the Twin Towers just the way CGIs do.


> You may LIE
> as often as you need, but reality will always contradict you.

ROTFLMAO because he knows a lot more about reality than you or Michael does. 
TH knows that the following is not the result of a "global collapse" as NIST 
and the media wants us to believe.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Still the crashes of jets into towers are consistent with CGIs flown into 
towers and the remains of the Twin Towers left a pattern that can only be 
acheived by something closer to one corner of them than they were to the 
multi floor Surviving Corners.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Just look at the photos and don't let people fool you with numbers without 
photos.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Rocky 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271080

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:

>On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 05:31:16 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
>wrote:

>>Am 15.11.2015 04:41, schrieb edrhodes@hotmail.com:

>>>> >  So: where did the towers go???
>>> They broke apart and were scattered across the plaza.
>>
>>This is not true.
>>

>     Most of the buildings did end up in the "bath tub." But in
>essence, Ed is correct.

>>A building consists of about 10% of its volume from hard materials and 
>>90% air.

About 95% air, but this is not important.


>>So a rough calculation would reveal, there was MUCH too little debris 
>>left behind.
>>

>     Huh? 

>>One tower was 400m (roughly) high and had about 100 floors.
>>
>>Ten percent makes a pile of ten floors or 40 m.
>>
>>But found were less than the hight of the main lobby.
>>

>     Because most of the debris was found in the "bath tub." This is
>very old news.

The "bath tub" was about 70' (22m) deep. The whole "bath tub" didn't fill,
of course, mostly just below the towers.  The WTC site is about 16 acres.  
(The towers were almost exactly 1 acre each)

>>The main lobby is easy to identify by the characteristic form of the 
>>perimeter columns.
>>
>>It had a hight of about four usual floors.
>>
>>So: two thirds of the debris went missing.

Only if you ignore the debris below the plaza level.

Anyway, 108,342 truckloads of debris, or 1.5 million tons, were removed
from the site.  The weight is the right amount for the whole World Trade
Center site.  Nothing significant was "missing".

We went to New York City Christmas, 2001.  We went to see "Ground Zero".
The site was fenced off but there was an overlook for gawking tourists.

At the time (late December) parts of the "bathtub" was empty but there
were huge piles of debris.  The tops of the piles had been dug down so the
tops were about 2 stories below street level but there was still plenty of
debris to be removed.  I couldn't place the piles but I figure the largest
were were the towers were.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271084

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:n2b2h6$fho$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 05:31:16 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
>>wrote:
>
>>>Am 15.11.2015 04:41, schrieb edrhodes@hotmail.com:
>
>>>>> >  So: where did the towers go???
>>>> They broke apart and were scattered across the plaza.
>>>
>>>This is not true.
>>>
>
>>     Most of the buildings did end up in the "bath tub." But in
>>essence, Ed is correct.
>
>>>A building consists of about 10% of its volume from hard materials and
>>>90% air.
>
> About 95% air, but this is not important.

ROTFLMAO because if that were true there should have been at least 5 floors 
of debris from a 110 story building and that is assuming that there would be 
no air in that debris but the 6 floors of the Surviving Staircase B were way 
above the pile of debris.

So what happend to the "hard materials?"  And we already know it didn't go 
under ground level or it would have crushed the Surviving Staircase and the 
multil floor surviving wall on the way down.  <G>
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg


>>>So a rough calculation would reveal, there was MUCH too little debris
>>>left behind.
>>>
>
>>     Huh?
>
>>>One tower was 400m (roughly) high and had about 100 floors.
>>>
>>>Ten percent makes a pile of ten floors or 40 m.
>>>
>>>But found were less than the hight of the main lobby.
>>>
>
>>     Because most of the debris was found in the "bath tub." This is
>>very old news.
>
> The "bath tub" was about 70' (22m) deep. The whole "bath tub" didn't fill,
> of course, mostly just below the towers.  The WTC site is about 16 acres.
> (The towers were almost exactly 1 acre each)

Wait a second.  There is no evidence anywhere that any of the debris went 
below ground level.  But there is evidence that the "hard material" above 
the Surviving Staircase B and the multi-floor Surviving Corners was 
vaporized before it had a chance to fall.  See:
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg


>>>The main lobby is easy to identify by the characteristic form of the
>>>perimeter columns.
>>>
>>>It had a hight of about four usual floors.
>>>
>>>So: two thirds of the debris went missing.
>
> Only if you ignore the debris below the plaza level.

But you are incorrect to assume anything ended up below plaza level and you 
have yet to explain how that debris missed the 6 floors of the Surviving 
Staircase and the 8 or more floors of the outside Surviving Corner.  <G>
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

> Anyway, 108,342 truckloads of debris, or 1.5 million tons, were removed
> from the site.  The weight is the right amount for the whole World Trade
> Center site.  Nothing significant was "missing".

And you are forgetting about all the dirt and resin that was hauled into the 
World Trade Center to cover up the radiation from those MRR nukes.

And the near complete lack of photos, just like the lack of photos with your 
Flight 93 bullshit says you are feeding us more bullshit.  <G>


> We went to New York City Christmas, 2001.  We went to see "Ground Zero".
> The site was fenced off but there was an overlook for gawking tourists.

BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT.  That was done so people could not get a good 
photo of the great big holes left by the deep underground MRR nukes you 
clown.


> At the time (late December) parts of the "bathtub" was empty but there
> were huge piles of debris.  The tops of the piles had been dug down so the
> tops were about 2 stories below street level but there was still plenty of
> debris to be removed.  I couldn't place the piles but I figure the largest
> were were the towers were.

Oh boy, more of your bullshit.  Don't forget, the outside walls of the Twin 
Towers can not be used to set the height of the debris because they were 
really "Surviving Corners" and should have been listed as what remained of 
the Twin Towers after what was above them was vaporized by a off-center deep 
underground MRR nuke or two.  See:
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Rocky 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271116

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:n2b2h6$fho$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>>A building consists of about 10% of its volume from hard materials and
>>>>90% air.
>>
>> About 95% air, but this is not important.

>ROTFLMAO because if that were true there should have been at least 5 floors 
>of debris from a 110 story building

There was.  The "bathtub" was 6-7 floors deep and add 3-4 floors to that 
and that's a total of 9-11 floors of debris.  Considering it wouldn't
have packed nice and neatly, that matches what we'd expect.

>>>     Because most of the debris was found in the "bath tub." This is
>>>very old news.
>>
>> The "bath tub" was about 70' (22m) deep. The whole "bath tub" didn't fill,
>> of course, mostly just below the towers.  The WTC site is about 16 acres.
>> (The towers were almost exactly 1 acre each)

>Wait a second.  There is no evidence anywhere that any of the debris went 
>below ground level.

Except, of course, for all of the debris below the towers.

>But you are incorrect to assume anything ended up below plaza level

No assumption necessary.  It was there.  They had to dig and dig and dig,
hauling out 108,342 truckloads of debris, 1.5 million tons of former
buildings and contents.  Do you think the plaza level floor was
superstrong compared to all the other floors so that it withstood 110
floors of building falling on it?  No, the collapse continued down until
it reached bedrock.

>> Anyway, 108,342 truckloads of debris, or 1.5 million tons, were removed
>> from the site.  The weight is the right amount for the whole World Trade
>> Center site.  Nothing significant was "missing".

>And you are forgetting about all the dirt and resin that was hauled into the 
>World Trade Center to cover up the radiation from those MRR nukes.

No, kooktard, what the voices in your head tell you isn't real.

Anyway, you earlier claimed that 120 truckloads of DE were brought in, 
which is why I earlier wrote that 108,222 truckloads of collapse debris
were brought out.

>And the near complete lack of photos, just like the lack of photos with your 
>Flight 93 bullshit says you are feeding us more bullshit.  <G>

You want photos?  Look, here's a photo for you!  And it's from a kooksite,
so maybe you'll actually believe it!  Not just any kooksite, but the very
same kooksite that hosts that NOAA photo with the kookscribbles added that
you always post here!!

http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg

It shows how the area below the towers was collapsed, while much of the
rest of the bathtub was mostly intact, including much of the PATH tracks.
This proves the tower collapse continued until it reached bedrock.

>> We went to New York City Christmas, 2001.  We went to see "Ground Zero".
>> The site was fenced off but there was an overlook for gawking tourists.

>BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT.

Say BULLSHIT all you want, but you can't tell me what I saw with my own
eyes.  Most of the ironwork for the below ground portions of the complex
had been removed, but there were still huge piles of debris being actively
worked on, whose tops were about two stories below street level.

>Oh boy, more of your bullshit.  Don't forget, the outside walls of the Twin 
>Towers can not be used to set the height of the debris

I judged the height of the debris by comparing it to street level/the top
of the bathtub walls.  The standing walls of the towers were long gone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271117

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:n2da4s$qvk$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:n2b2h6$fho$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>>A building consists of about 10% of its volume from hard materials and
>>>>>90% air.
>>>
>>> About 95% air, but this is not important.
>
>>ROTFLMAO because if that were true there should have been at least 5 
>>floors
>>of debris from a 110 story building
>
> There was.  The "bathtub" was 6-7 floors deep and add 3-4 floors to that
> and that's a total of 9-11 floors of debris.  Considering it wouldn't
> have packed nice and neatly, that matches what we'd expect.

YOU ARE SUCH A TOTAL IDIOT TO THINK PEOPLE ARE AS STUPID AS YOU BECAUSE YOU 
FORGOT THE EVIDENCE BELOW:
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

There is no way in hell that debris could selectively not fall on both the 6 
floors of Stairwell B and the 8 or 9 floors of the Surviving Corner at the 
same time.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

What was left of the North Tower clearly shows whatever vaporized it 
vaporized it from the side that is closest to the ground, took care of the 
stuff above the survivors which means floors 7 - 110 and then failed to 
vaporize 8 or 9 floors of the Surviving Corner of WTC1 because that was 
furthest from the MRR nuke.  See:
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

And as with the parts of the top of the South Tower they had to fall outside 
of the vaporization range to make it to the ground in one piece as proven by 
the parts of the South Tower that fell on the far side of WTC3.  <G>

And do not forget you have absolutely no photographic evidence that they 
found Flight 93 in pieces instead of a complete jet.

And you have plenty of photographic evidence that the two jets in Nuke York 
City were just CGIs.

People tried to say that Flight 93 crashed inverted but then that wouldn't 
explain the marks in the ground that were in reality there long before the 
9/11 bullshit.

Rocky 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271123

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:n2da4s$qvk$1@pcls7.std.com...

>>>ROTFLMAO because if that were true there should have been at least 5 
>>>floors
>>>of debris from a 110 story building
>>
>> There was.  The "bathtub" was 6-7 floors deep and add 3-4 floors to that
>> and that's a total of 9-11 floors of debris.  Considering it wouldn't
>> have packed nice and neatly, that matches what we'd expect.

>YOU ARE SUCH A TOTAL IDIOT TO THINK PEOPLE ARE AS STUPID AS YOU BECAUSE YOU 
>FORGOT THE EVIDENCE BELOW:
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Calm down, kooktard.  You're foaming at the mouth.

No comment about this image from that VERY SAME KOOKSITE?
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg
It shows the area directly below the towers as being collapsed, with very
little of the rest of the "bathtub" being collapsed.  That directly shows
that the collapses continued into the basement levels, all the way to
bedrock, and therefore there is nothing unusual about the height of the
debris pile, because there is so much debris in the basement levels.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271124

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:n2di9o$aun$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:n2da4s$qvk$1@pcls7.std.com...
>
>>>>ROTFLMAO because if that were true there should have been at least 5
>>>>floors
>>>>of debris from a 110 story building
>>>
>>> There was.  The "bathtub" was 6-7 floors deep and add 3-4 floors to that
>>> and that's a total of 9-11 floors of debris.  Considering it wouldn't
>>> have packed nice and neatly, that matches what we'd expect.
>
>>YOU ARE SUCH A TOTAL IDIOT TO THINK PEOPLE ARE AS STUPID AS YOU BECAUSE 
>>YOU
>>FORGOT THE EVIDENCE BELOW:
>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>
> Calm down, kooktard.  You're foaming at the mouth.
>
> No comment about this image from that VERY SAME KOOKSITE?
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg
> It shows the area directly below the towers as being collapsed, with very
> little of the rest of the "bathtub" being collapsed.  That directly shows
> that the collapses continued into the basement levels, all the way to
> bedrock, and therefore there is nothing unusual about the height of the
> debris pile, because there is so much debris in the basement levels.

AND AGAIN YOU FAIL TO EXPLAIN WHY THE DEBRIS COMPLETELY MISSED 6 FLOORS OF 
STAIRCASE B and COMPLETELY MISSED 8-10 FLOORS OF THE SURVIVING CORNERS of 
the North Tower.  See:
  http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

A more likely scenario is that in the enormous cloud of dust the debris 
didn't fall down but floated away and that would be possible with MRR nukes 
and you still haven't addressed what reading a 1kt nuke would make and how 
high the noise level was for seismographs in Nuke York City on 9/11/01.

AND it is possible that the floors under the Twin Towers were damaged even 
before the alleged collapse because the perpetraitors needed some way to get 
the water out of the storage tanks that would have been used for putting out 
fires above ground level and get it to fill the basement instead.  DUH

--------------------------------

And you failed to address why the two jets in Nuke York City resembled CGIs. 
<G>

And I can go one step further and point out that the jet that rammed the 
North Tower isn't even consistent with a blurred 767.  <G>

Rocky 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271142

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>A more likely scenario is that in the enormous cloud of dust the debris 
>didn't fall down but floated away and that would be possible with MRR nukes 
>and you still haven't addressed what reading a 1kt nuke would make and how 
>high the noise level was for seismographs in Nuke York City on 9/11/01.

No reason for such kooktardery.  We now know, from your very own kooksite,
that the space below each tower was fully collapsed.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg

>AND it is possible that the floors under the Twin Towers were damaged even 
>before the alleged collapse because the perpetraitors needed some way to get 
>the water out of the storage tanks that would have been used for putting out 
>fires above ground level and get it to fill the basement instead.  DUH

No, it's not possible.  Doing so would mean the lower levels had to be
destroyed even before the first plane hit.  Definitely not true, it was a
perfectly normal day up until 8:45 AM.

Why come up with such kookery when a simple collapse all the way down to
bedrock explains everything in your "blast3.jpeg" picture?  Everything
except for the added kookscribbles, that is.

>And you failed to address why the two jets in Nuke York City resembled CGIs. 

Because, of course, they didn't.

>And I can go one step further and point out that the jet that rammed the 
>North Tower isn't even consistent with a blurred 767.  <G>

Of course you would.  You kooktarded little mind simply can't accept the
fact that 19 crazed terrorists hijacked 4 planes and deliberately crashed
them.  You have to come up with kooktarded explanations like nukes that
require magic to make them work.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271524

In article <n2fma8$d5g$3@pcls7.std.com>,
 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
> 
> >A more likely scenario is that in the enormous cloud of dust the debris 
> >didn't fall down but floated away and that would be possible with MRR nukes 
> >and you still haven't addressed what reading a 1kt nuke would make and how 
> >high the noise level was for seismographs in Nuke York City on 9/11/01.
> 
> No reason for such kooktardery.  We now know, from your very own kooksite,
> that the space below each tower was fully collapsed.
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-
> New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg
> 
> >AND it is possible that the floors under the Twin Towers were damaged even 
> >before the alleged collapse because the perpetraitors needed some way to get 
> >the water out of the storage tanks that would have been used for putting out 
> >fires above ground level and get it to fill the basement instead.  DUH
> 
> No, it's not possible.  Doing so would mean the lower levels had to be
> destroyed even before the first plane hit.  Definitely not true, it was a
> perfectly normal day up until 8:45 AM.
> 
> Why come up with such kookery when a simple collapse all the way down to
> bedrock explains everything in your "blast3.jpeg" picture?  Everything
> except for the added kookscribbles, that is.
> 
> >And you failed to address why the two jets in Nuke York City resembled CGIs. 
> 
> Because, of course, they didn't.
> 
> >And I can go one step further and point out that the jet that rammed the 
> >North Tower isn't even consistent with a blurred 767.  <G>
> 
> Of course you would.  You kooktarded little mind simply can't accept the
> fact that 19 crazed terrorists hijacked 4 planes and deliberately crashed
> them.  You have to come up with kooktarded explanations like nukes that
> require magic to make them work.

or;
http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/
-- 
Karma ; what a concept!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271531

In article <georgewk10-4D1EF9.06505130112015@news.toast.net>,
 Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> wrote:

> http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

and
The US, France, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, and the Gulf monarchies 
have all in the recent past supported al Qaeda and/or the Islamic State 
(ISIS) with arms, money, and/or manpower.

The first example of this was in 1979 when the United States began 
covert operations in Afghanistan, six months before the Russians 
arrived, promoting Islamic fundamentalism across the southern tier of 
the Soviet Union against "godless communism". All the al-Qaeda/Taliban 
shit then followed.

In addition to Afghanistan, the United States has provided support to 
Islamic militants in Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, the Caucasus, and Syria.

The United States overthrew the secular governments of Afghanistan, 
Iraq, and Libya and is trying to do the same with Syria, thus giving 
great impetus to the rise of ISIS. Said Barack Obama in March of this 
year: "ISIS is a direct outgrowth of al-Qaeda in Iraq that grew out of 
our invasion. Which is an example of unintended consequences. Which is 
why we should generally aim before we shoot."
-- 
Karma ; what a concept!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271533

In article <georgewk10-4D1EF9.06505130112015@news.toast.net>, georgewk10
@yahoo.com says...
> 
> In article <n2fma8$d5g$3@pcls7.std.com>,
>  moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
> 
> > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
> > 
> > >A more likely scenario is that in the enormous cloud of dust the debris 
> > >didn't fall down but floated away and that would be possible with MRR nukes 
> > >and you still haven't addressed what reading a 1kt nuke would make and how 
> > >high the noise level was for seismographs in Nuke York City on 9/11/01.
> > 
> > No reason for such kooktardery.  We now know, from your very own kooksite,
> > that the space below each tower was fully collapsed.
> > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2-PATH-bathtub-damage-
> > New-York-Times_IMPROVED.jpg
> > 
> > >AND it is possible that the floors under the Twin Towers were damaged even 
> > >before the alleged collapse because the perpetraitors needed some way to get 
> > >the water out of the storage tanks that would have been used for putting out 
> > >fires above ground level and get it to fill the basement instead.  DUH
> > 
> > No, it's not possible.  Doing so would mean the lower levels had to be
> > destroyed even before the first plane hit.  Definitely not true, it was a
> > perfectly normal day up until 8:45 AM.
> > 
> > Why come up with such kookery when a simple collapse all the way down to
> > bedrock explains everything in your "blast3.jpeg" picture?  Everything
> > except for the added kookscribbles, that is.
> > 
> > >And you failed to address why the two jets in Nuke York City resembled CGIs. 
> > 
> > Because, of course, they didn't.
> > 
> > >And I can go one step further and point out that the jet that rammed the 
> > >North Tower isn't even consistent with a blurred 767.  <G>
> > 
> > Of course you would.  You kooktarded little mind simply can't accept the
> > fact that 19 crazed terrorists hijacked 4 planes and deliberately crashed
> > them.  You have to come up with kooktarded explanations like nukes that
> > require magic to make them work.
> 
> or;
> http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

You poor kOOktard. What I want to know is what happened to your brain to 
make you swallow so much BS?

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271588

In article <MPG.30c6417e9b21b17a98c3f0@news.giganews.com>,
 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote:

> You poor kOOktard. What I want to know is what happened to your brain to 
> make you swallow so much BS?

and you "bought"  WMD in Iraq.
still paying for that mistake ?
Trillions ?
-- 
Karma ; what a concept!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271599

In article <georgewk10-87E8AE.09312201122015@news.toast.net>, georgewk10
@yahoo.com says...
> 
> In article <MPG.30c6417e9b21b17a98c3f0@news.giganews.com>,
>  BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote:
> 
> > You poor kOOktard. What I want to know is what happened to your brain to 
> > make you swallow so much BS?
> 
> and you "bought"  WMD in Iraq.
> still paying for that mistake ?
> Trillions ?

When did I buy that? I wasn't posting about that, I was posting about 
911 Troofer bullshit. They are only connected in that 911 was used as an 
excuse to go after Saddam/Iraq. You and the other troofers need to think 
about stuff and not just "feel" about it. 

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271633

On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 09:31:22 -0800, Shoe-Chucker 2
<georgewk10@yahoo.com> wrote:

>In article <MPG.30c6417e9b21b17a98c3f0@news.giganews.com>,
> BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote:
>
>> You poor kOOktard. What I want to know is what happened to your brain to 
>> make you swallow so much BS?
>
>and you "bought"  WMD in Iraq.

     That you claim it is very strong evidence that BDK didn't.

>still paying for that mistake ?

     No more than you are. Unless you're committing tax fraud.

>Trillions ?

     I doubt BDK has that much money. Bill Gates is believed to be
worth $79+ billion, so BDK being able to borrow enough to be trillions
of dollars in debt is logically impossible.
     But then, truth and honesty are things you can't accept when
you're a Troofer.

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271678

In article <georgewk10-87E8AE.09312201122015@news.toast.net>,
 Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <MPG.30c6417e9b21b17a98c3f0@news.giganews.com>,
>  BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote:
> 
> > You poor kOOktard. What I want to know is what happened to your brain to 
> > make you swallow so much BS?
> 
> and you "bought"  WMD in Iraq.
> still paying for that mistake ?
> Trillions ?

visit Youtube ; re; 9/11
almost no one who looked into it. believes the official story.
-- 
Karma ; what a concept!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271695

On Wed, 02 Dec 2015 18:12:10 -0800, Shoe-Chucker 2
<georgewk10@yahoo.com> wrote:

>In article <georgewk10-87E8AE.09312201122015@news.toast.net>,
> Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <MPG.30c6417e9b21b17a98c3f0@news.giganews.com>,
>>  BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > You poor kOOktard. What I want to know is what happened to your brain to 
>> > make you swallow so much BS?
>> 
>> and you "bought"  WMD in Iraq.
>> still paying for that mistake ?
>> Trillions ?
>
>visit Youtube ; re; 9/11

     Been there. Done that. Laughed a lot.

>almost no one who looked into it. 

     That's a poorly constructed sentence.

>believes the official story.

     Another poorly constructed sentence. And you're supposed to
capitalize the first word of a sentence.

-- 
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#271703

In article <georgewk10-C85DB9.18121002122015@news.toast.net>, georgewk10
@yahoo.com says...
> 
> In article <georgewk10-87E8AE.09312201122015@news.toast.net>,
>  Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <MPG.30c6417e9b21b17a98c3f0@news.giganews.com>,
> >  BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > You poor kOOktard. What I want to know is what happened to your brain to 
> > > make you swallow so much BS?
> > 
> > and you "bought"  WMD in Iraq.
> > still paying for that mistake ?
> > Trillions ?
> 
> visit Youtube ; re; 9/11
> almost no one who looked into it. believes the official story.

Quite the contrary, the vast majority see troofery for the bullshit it 
is.

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.conspiracy

csiph-web