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

Groups > alt.conspiracy > #264756 > unrolled thread

WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys

Back to article view | Back to alt.conspiracy

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 12:40 -0500
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 12:47 -0500
      Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 13:02 -0500
        Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:23 +0000
        Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 15:50 -0500
        Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-24 12:06 -0400
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 10:53 -0700
      Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 15:56 -0500
        caught gilber34 in bullshit (was: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 16:41 -0500
          Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 21:44 +0000
          Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit (was: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys) je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 15:02 -0700
          Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 17:07 -0500
            Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 17:22 -0500
              Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 18:20 -0500
                caught gilber34 in even more bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 20:00 -0500
                  Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 18:07 -0700
                    Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 20:24 -0500
                      Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 18:36 -0700
                      Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 02:29 +0000
                      Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:04 -0500
                        Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:11 +0100
                          Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:16 -0500
                            Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 10:06 +0100
                  Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 02:28 +0000
                  Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:02 -0500
                  Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 06:07 +0200
              Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 01:48 +0200
                Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 20:52 -0500
                  Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 02:30 +0000
                  Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 05:47 +0200
                    Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 04:12 -0500
                      Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@sci.physics.cunt.scabs> - 2015-08-25 10:45 +0000
                        Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 08:11 -0500
                          Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 16:38 +0000
                      Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 08:00 -0500
                        Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 11:18 -0500
                        Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 16:39 +0000
                        Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 19:06 +0200
                          Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 12:54 -0500
                            Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:19 -0500
                            Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 04:51 +0200
                      Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 17:12 +0200
                        Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 10:32 -0500
                          Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 20:02 +0200
                            Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 13:37 -0500
                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-24 15:08 -0400
                                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 04:40 +0200
                                  Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 23:53 -0500
                                    Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 08:52 +0200
                                      Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-08-25 08:03 +0100
                                        Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 08:58 -0500
                                          Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 17:25 +0200
                                            Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 10:52 -0500
                                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-25 11:34 -0500
                                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 16:47 +0000
                                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 20:31 +0200
                                            Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 21:24 -0500
                                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-26 08:06 -0400
                                  Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-25 11:00 -0400
                                    Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 18:42 +0200
                                      Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-25 13:09 -0400
                                        Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-26 03:44 +0200
                                          Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-26 08:00 -0400
                                            Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-26 19:59 +0200
                                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-26 15:39 -0400
                                                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-27 06:42 +0200
                                                  Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-27 09:58 -0400
                                                    Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-27 20:09 +0200
                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 19:28 +0000
                              Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 05:29 +0200
                      Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 16:35 +0000
                      Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:57 -0500
              Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 00:10 +0000
          Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 23:15 +0100
            Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 18:08 -0500
              Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 00:11 +0000
              Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:11 -0500
                Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 21:20 -0700
                  Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 18:47 +0200
                    Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 12:24 -0500
                      Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:11 +0100
                      Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:20 -0500
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:20 +0000
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 22:35 +0200
      Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 17:28 -0500
        Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 01:32 +0200
        Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 17:28 -0500
          Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 23:48 +0100
            Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 23:17 +0000
          Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 19:59 -0500
          Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:21 -0500
          Re: w.t.c towers (no asbestos cladding <period "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 16:17 -0500
            Re: w.t.c towers (no asbestos cladding <period "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-24 09:19 -0500
              Re: w.t.c towers (no asbestos cladding <period "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:18 -0500
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 16:19 -0500

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

#264756 — WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys

WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
        (PLEASE COPY & SHARE)
Published on Sep 10, 2012

Nuclear Devices Used at WTC GROUND ZERO
More in comment section of the following video
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YZ8wVBQycY

And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to 
vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries 
smoke out of the area.

And to see that NIST helped to add to the Great 9/11 Hoax see:

"NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence"
Published on Jun 28, 2015

How many columns were severed by the airplanes that hit the Twin Towers and 
was the damage the impacts caused enough to seriously compromise the 
structural integrity of the towers?

Excerpts from the following have been used in this series of videos:

Kevin Ryan: Toronto 9/11 Hearings:
 https://youtu.be/ltgJLzMtbyM

Kevin Ryan: A New Standard in Deception:
 https://youtu.be/VsfLQAclHA0

September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor (full):
 https://youtu.be/8DOnAn_PX6M

Tony Szamboti Interview 2014 : On NIST's 9/11 Sins of Omission
 https://youtu.be/x-PA8pjaU3k

Ed Munyak, FPE - Fire Protection Engineer - AE911Truth.org:
 https://youtu.be/c0QEutd1Unc

Tony Szamboti, M.E. - Mechanical Engineer AE911Truth.org:
 https://youtu.be/4V3WdpzaA4o

Kevin Ryan : On Why NIST's 9/11 WTC Reports are False & Unscientific:
 https://youtu.be/Fs9nHDDBtfA

9/11: The Best Physical Evidence of Explosives - David Chandler Lecture:
 https://youtu.be/DPwwcXF_V0c

Recommended related videos:

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out:
 https://youtu.be/Ddz2mw2vaEg

9/11 Exposed Second Edition:
 https://youtu.be/DXRDq9nKJ0U

The Twin Towers And Their Destruction:
 https://youtu.be/rg_PxAVeGHA

WTC 7: Fires Fuelled by Office Furnishings. Be AFRAID!:
 https://youtu.be/2qn1Iu6olJQ

Take the 47 Minute Building 7 Challenge!:
 https://youtu.be/E6s0Gam54mk

Related reading:

The for links below did not cut and paste so you will have to get them from 
the comment seconds of the following playlist:

Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports:
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/arti...

Kevin Ryan: How Science Died at the World Trade Centre:
http://digwithin.net/2015/02/15/scien...

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC Report on the Towers is False:
http://digwithin.net/2013/09/05/nist-...

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False:
http://digwithin.net/2011/07/09/why-t...

According to the NIST report, only 14% to 15% of the columns were cut, in 
each of the towers. On page 133 of Glanz and Lipton's book 'City in the Sky' 
they summarise the findings of a white paper by Worthington, Skilling, Helle 
& Jackson White, the Structural Engineers who designed the Twin Towers, as 
follows:

"The Vierendeel trusses would be so effective, according to the engineers' 
calculations, that all the columns on one side of a tower could be cut, as 
well as the two corners and several columns on the adjacent sides, and the 
tower would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind."

And in the Engineering News-Record, April 2, 1964:

"One could cut away all the first-story columns on one side of the building, 
and part way from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building 
could still withstand design live loads and a 100-mph wind force from any 
direction."

And . . .

"Live loads on these perimeter columns can be increased more than 2,000% 
before failure occurs."

And in regard the the plane impacts, from the NIST report - NIST NCSTAR 1-2 
Appendix A (photostats of John Skilling's 3 page paper from 1964, see 
paragraph outlined in box, with red underlining)

 http://pilotsfor911truth.org/WTC.html

"The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed 
collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8) travelling at 600 
mph. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local 
damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building 
and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the 
immediate area of the impact."

And from the Seattle Times, 1993, an interview with John Skilling, Chief 
Structural Engineer of the World Trade Centre . . .

 http://tinyurl.com/6or8qv

Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building, 
Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the 
impact of a Boeing 707.

"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the 
fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a 
horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building 
structure would still be there."

 https://youtu.be/zvCuMULutHs?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#264760

On 8/23/2015 12:40 PM, Rocky wrote:
> WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys

<snip crap>
quack, QUacK !  QUaCk QUUUUAAAACCKKKKKKKKKKKK !!!!

quack.

make something else up, nobody believe that post.

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

#264764

"gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message 
news:mrd0vr$pg$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 8/23/2015 12:40 PM, Rocky wrote:
>> WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
> >  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YZ8wVBQycY
>
> make something else up, nobody believe that post.

You clown.  It isn't what is in my post but what is in the videos presented. 
DUH

------- Copy of OP below --------------------

WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
        (PLEASE COPY & SHARE)
Published on Sep 10, 2012

Nuclear Devices Used at WTC GROUND ZERO
More in comment section of the following video
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YZ8wVBQycY

And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to
vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries
smoke out of the area.

And to see that NIST helped to add to the Great 9/11 Hoax see:

"NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence"
Published on Jun 28, 2015

How many columns were severed by the airplanes that hit the Twin Towers and
was the damage the impacts caused enough to seriously compromise the
structural integrity of the towers?

Excerpts from the following have been used in this series of videos:

Kevin Ryan: Toronto 9/11 Hearings:
 https://youtu.be/ltgJLzMtbyM

Kevin Ryan: A New Standard in Deception:
 https://youtu.be/VsfLQAclHA0

September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor (full):
 https://youtu.be/8DOnAn_PX6M

Tony Szamboti Interview 2014 : On NIST's 9/11 Sins of Omission
 https://youtu.be/x-PA8pjaU3k

Ed Munyak, FPE - Fire Protection Engineer - AE911Truth.org:
 https://youtu.be/c0QEutd1Unc

Tony Szamboti, M.E. - Mechanical Engineer AE911Truth.org:
 https://youtu.be/4V3WdpzaA4o

Kevin Ryan : On Why NIST's 9/11 WTC Reports are False & Unscientific:
 https://youtu.be/Fs9nHDDBtfA

9/11: The Best Physical Evidence of Explosives - David Chandler Lecture:
 https://youtu.be/DPwwcXF_V0c

Recommended related videos:

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out:
 https://youtu.be/Ddz2mw2vaEg

9/11 Exposed Second Edition:
 https://youtu.be/DXRDq9nKJ0U

The Twin Towers And Their Destruction:
 https://youtu.be/rg_PxAVeGHA

WTC 7: Fires Fuelled by Office Furnishings. Be AFRAID!:
 https://youtu.be/2qn1Iu6olJQ

Take the 47 Minute Building 7 Challenge!:
 https://youtu.be/E6s0Gam54mk

Related reading:

The for links below did not cut and paste so you will have to get them from
the comment seconds of the following playlist:

Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports:
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/arti...

Kevin Ryan: How Science Died at the World Trade Centre:
http://digwithin.net/2015/02/15/scien...

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC Report on the Towers is False:
http://digwithin.net/2013/09/05/nist-...

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False:
http://digwithin.net/2011/07/09/why-t...

According to the NIST report, only 14% to 15% of the columns were cut, in
each of the towers. On page 133 of Glanz and Lipton's book 'City in the Sky'
they summarise the findings of a white paper by Worthington, Skilling, Helle
& Jackson White, the Structural Engineers who designed the Twin Towers, as
follows:

"The Vierendeel trusses would be so effective, according to the engineers'
calculations, that all the columns on one side of a tower could be cut, as
well as the two corners and several columns on the adjacent sides, and the
tower would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind."

And in the Engineering News-Record, April 2, 1964:

"One could cut away all the first-story columns on one side of the building,
and part way from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building
could still withstand design live loads and a 100-mph wind force from any
direction."

And . . .

"Live loads on these perimeter columns can be increased more than 2,000%
before failure occurs."

And in regard the the plane impacts, from the NIST report - NIST NCSTAR 1-2
Appendix A (photostats of John Skilling's 3 page paper from 1964, see
paragraph outlined in box, with red underlining)

 http://pilotsfor911truth.org/WTC.html

"The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed
collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8) travelling at 600
mph. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local
damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building
and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the
immediate area of the impact."

And from the Seattle Times, 1993, an interview with John Skilling, Chief
Structural Engineer of the World Trade Centre . . .

 http://tinyurl.com/6or8qv

Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building,
Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the
impact of a Boeing 707.

"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the
fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a
horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building
structure would still be there."

 https://youtu.be/zvCuMULutHs?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W


WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
        (PLEASE COPY & SHARE)
Published on Sep 10, 2012

Nuclear Devices Used at WTC GROUND ZERO
More in comment section of the following video
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YZ8wVBQycY

And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to
vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries
smoke out of the area.

And to see that NIST helped to add to the Great 9/11 Hoax see:

"NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence"
Published on Jun 28, 2015

How many columns were severed by the airplanes that hit the Twin Towers and
was the damage the impacts caused enough to seriously compromise the
structural integrity of the towers?

Excerpts from the following have been used in this series of videos:

Kevin Ryan: Toronto 9/11 Hearings:
 https://youtu.be/ltgJLzMtbyM

Kevin Ryan: A New Standard in Deception:
 https://youtu.be/VsfLQAclHA0

September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor (full):
 https://youtu.be/8DOnAn_PX6M

Tony Szamboti Interview 2014 : On NIST's 9/11 Sins of Omission
 https://youtu.be/x-PA8pjaU3k

Ed Munyak, FPE - Fire Protection Engineer - AE911Truth.org:
 https://youtu.be/c0QEutd1Unc

Tony Szamboti, M.E. - Mechanical Engineer AE911Truth.org:
 https://youtu.be/4V3WdpzaA4o

Kevin Ryan : On Why NIST's 9/11 WTC Reports are False & Unscientific:
 https://youtu.be/Fs9nHDDBtfA

9/11: The Best Physical Evidence of Explosives - David Chandler Lecture:
 https://youtu.be/DPwwcXF_V0c

Recommended related videos:

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out:
 https://youtu.be/Ddz2mw2vaEg

9/11 Exposed Second Edition:
 https://youtu.be/DXRDq9nKJ0U

The Twin Towers And Their Destruction:
 https://youtu.be/rg_PxAVeGHA

WTC 7: Fires Fuelled by Office Furnishings. Be AFRAID!:
 https://youtu.be/2qn1Iu6olJQ

Take the 47 Minute Building 7 Challenge!:
 https://youtu.be/E6s0Gam54mk

Related reading:

The for links below did not cut and paste so you will have to get them from
the comment seconds of the following playlist:

Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports:
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/arti...

Kevin Ryan: How Science Died at the World Trade Centre:
http://digwithin.net/2015/02/15/scien...

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC Report on the Towers is False:
http://digwithin.net/2013/09/05/nist-...

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False:
http://digwithin.net/2011/07/09/why-t...

According to the NIST report, only 14% to 15% of the columns were cut, in
each of the towers. On page 133 of Glanz and Lipton's book 'City in the Sky'
they summarise the findings of a white paper by Worthington, Skilling, Helle
& Jackson White, the Structural Engineers who designed the Twin Towers, as
follows:

"The Vierendeel trusses would be so effective, according to the engineers'
calculations, that all the columns on one side of a tower could be cut, as
well as the two corners and several columns on the adjacent sides, and the
tower would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind."

And in the Engineering News-Record, April 2, 1964:

"One could cut away all the first-story columns on one side of the building,
and part way from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building
could still withstand design live loads and a 100-mph wind force from any
direction."

And . . .

"Live loads on these perimeter columns can be increased more than 2,000%
before failure occurs."

And in regard the the plane impacts, from the NIST report - NIST NCSTAR 1-2
Appendix A (photostats of John Skilling's 3 page paper from 1964, see
paragraph outlined in box, with red underlining)

 http://pilotsfor911truth.org/WTC.html

"The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed
collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8) travelling at 600
mph. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local
damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building
and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the
immediate area of the impact."

And from the Seattle Times, 1993, an interview with John Skilling, Chief
Structural Engineer of the World Trade Centre . . .

 http://tinyurl.com/6or8qv

Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building,
Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the
impact of a Boeing 707.

"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the
fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a
horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building
structure would still be there."

 https://youtu.be/zvCuMULutHs?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W

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

#264775

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> You clown.  It isn't what is in my post but what is in the videos presented. 

What is important is what WAS and what WAS NOT recorded by any seismograph
anywhere on the planet, you raving lunatic.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected
by nearby seismographs.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html

<snip remaining kook babble>


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#264842

On 8/23/2015 1:02 PM, Rocky wrote:
> "gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:mrd0vr$pg$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>> On 8/23/2015 12:40 PM, Rocky wrote:
>>> WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys

>>
>> make something else up, nobody believe that post.
>
> You clown.  It isn't what is in my post but what is in the videos presented.
> DUH


it is *your posts* and *you believe in what you post*, and you post 
crap, *dog poop*, fiction, *lawn rockets*, unbelieveble *sewage*, mind 
farts, etc etc.

go take your nuks and twins, and and....... drive your beer truck 
swamp-um buggy smoke-um dope-um bat shit crazy medical meth bozo and and 
... post about something else.



there was no radiation measured by anyone at anytime for 500 miles 
around the site to this day.

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

#264975

In article <4JidnQ1MRe7Sl0fInZ2dnUU7-SWdnZ2d@giganews.com>, 
wookiee@att.net says...
> 
> "gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message 
> news:mrd0vr$pg$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> > On 8/23/2015 12:40 PM, Rocky wrote:
> >> WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
> > >  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YZ8wVBQycY
> >
> > make something else up, nobody believe that post.
> 
> You clown.  It isn't what is in my post but what is in the videos presented. 
> DUH
> 

The quack quack response to your bullshit was 100% appropriate.

> ------- Copy of OP below --------------------
> 
> WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
>         (PLEASE COPY & SHARE)
> Published on Sep 10, 2012
> 
> Nuclear Devices Used at WTC GROUND ZERO
> More in comment section of the following video
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YZ8wVBQycY
> 
> And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to
> vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries
> smoke out of the area.
> 
> And to see that NIST helped to add to the Great 9/11 Hoax see:
> 
> "NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence"
> Published on Jun 28, 2015
> 
> How many columns were severed by the airplanes that hit the Twin Towers and
> was the damage the impacts caused enough to seriously compromise the
> structural integrity of the towers?
> 
> Excerpts from the following have been used in this series of videos:
> 
> Kevin Ryan: Toronto 9/11 Hearings:
>  https://youtu.be/ltgJLzMtbyM
> 
> Kevin Ryan: A New Standard in Deception:
>  https://youtu.be/VsfLQAclHA0
> 
> September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor (full):
>  https://youtu.be/8DOnAn_PX6M
> 
> Tony Szamboti Interview 2014 : On NIST's 9/11 Sins of Omission
>  https://youtu.be/x-PA8pjaU3k
> 
> Ed Munyak, FPE - Fire Protection Engineer - AE911Truth.org:
>  https://youtu.be/c0QEutd1Unc
> 
> Tony Szamboti, M.E. - Mechanical Engineer AE911Truth.org:
>  https://youtu.be/4V3WdpzaA4o
> 
> Kevin Ryan : On Why NIST's 9/11 WTC Reports are False & Unscientific:
>  https://youtu.be/Fs9nHDDBtfA
> 
> 9/11: The Best Physical Evidence of Explosives - David Chandler Lecture:
>  https://youtu.be/DPwwcXF_V0c
> 
> Recommended related videos:
> 
> 9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out:
>  https://youtu.be/Ddz2mw2vaEg
> 
> 9/11 Exposed Second Edition:
>  https://youtu.be/DXRDq9nKJ0U
> 
> The Twin Towers And Their Destruction:
>  https://youtu.be/rg_PxAVeGHA
> 
> WTC 7: Fires Fuelled by Office Furnishings. Be AFRAID!:
>  https://youtu.be/2qn1Iu6olJQ
> 
> Take the 47 Minute Building 7 Challenge!:
>  https://youtu.be/E6s0Gam54mk
> 
> Related reading:
> 
> The for links below did not cut and paste so you will have to get them from
> the comment seconds of the following playlist:
> 
> Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports:
> http://www.ae911truth.org/images/arti...
> 
> Kevin Ryan: How Science Died at the World Trade Centre:
> http://digwithin.net/2015/02/15/scien...
> 
> Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC Report on the Towers is False:
> http://digwithin.net/2013/09/05/nist-...
> 
> Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False:
> http://digwithin.net/2011/07/09/why-t...
> 
> According to the NIST report, only 14% to 15% of the columns were cut, in
> each of the towers. On page 133 of Glanz and Lipton's book 'City in the Sky'
> they summarise the findings of a white paper by Worthington, Skilling, Helle
> & Jackson White, the Structural Engineers who designed the Twin Towers, as
> follows:
> 
> "The Vierendeel trusses would be so effective, according to the engineers'
> calculations, that all the columns on one side of a tower could be cut, as
> well as the two corners and several columns on the adjacent sides, and the
> tower would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind."
> 
> And in the Engineering News-Record, April 2, 1964:
> 
> "One could cut away all the first-story columns on one side of the building,
> and part way from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building
> could still withstand design live loads and a 100-mph wind force from any
> direction."
> 
> And . . .
> 
> "Live loads on these perimeter columns can be increased more than 2,000%
> before failure occurs."
> 
> And in regard the the plane impacts, from the NIST report - NIST NCSTAR 1-2
> Appendix A (photostats of John Skilling's 3 page paper from 1964, see
> paragraph outlined in box, with red underlining)
> 
>  http://pilotsfor911truth.org/WTC.html
> 
> "The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed
> collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8) travelling at 600
> mph. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local
> damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building
> and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the
> immediate area of the impact."
> 
> And from the Seattle Times, 1993, an interview with John Skilling, Chief
> Structural Engineer of the World Trade Centre . . .
> 
>  http://tinyurl.com/6or8qv
> 
> Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building,
> Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the
> impact of a Boeing 707.
> 
> "Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the
> fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a
> horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building
> structure would still be there."
> 
>  https://youtu.be/zvCuMULutHs?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
> 
> 
> WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
>         (PLEASE COPY & SHARE)
> Published on Sep 10, 2012
> 
> Nuclear Devices Used at WTC GROUND ZERO
> More in comment section of the following video
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YZ8wVBQycY
> 
> And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to
> vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries
> smoke out of the area.
> 
> And to see that NIST helped to add to the Great 9/11 Hoax see:
> 
> "NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence"
> Published on Jun 28, 2015
> 
> How many columns were severed by the airplanes that hit the Twin Towers and
> was the damage the impacts caused enough to seriously compromise the
> structural integrity of the towers?
> 
> Excerpts from the following have been used in this series of videos:
> 
> Kevin Ryan: Toronto 9/11 Hearings:
>  https://youtu.be/ltgJLzMtbyM
> 
> Kevin Ryan: A New Standard in Deception:
>  https://youtu.be/VsfLQAclHA0
> 
> September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor (full):
>  https://youtu.be/8DOnAn_PX6M
> 
> Tony Szamboti Interview 2014 : On NIST's 9/11 Sins of Omission
>  https://youtu.be/x-PA8pjaU3k
> 
> Ed Munyak, FPE - Fire Protection Engineer - AE911Truth.org:
>  https://youtu.be/c0QEutd1Unc
> 
> Tony Szamboti, M.E. - Mechanical Engineer AE911Truth.org:
>  https://youtu.be/4V3WdpzaA4o
> 
> Kevin Ryan : On Why NIST's 9/11 WTC Reports are False & Unscientific:
>  https://youtu.be/Fs9nHDDBtfA
> 
> 9/11: The Best Physical Evidence of Explosives - David Chandler Lecture:
>  https://youtu.be/DPwwcXF_V0c
> 
> Recommended related videos:
> 
> 9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out:
>  https://youtu.be/Ddz2mw2vaEg
> 
> 9/11 Exposed Second Edition:
>  https://youtu.be/DXRDq9nKJ0U
> 
> The Twin Towers And Their Destruction:
>  https://youtu.be/rg_PxAVeGHA
> 
> WTC 7: Fires Fuelled by Office Furnishings. Be AFRAID!:
>  https://youtu.be/2qn1Iu6olJQ
> 
> Take the 47 Minute Building 7 Challenge!:
>  https://youtu.be/E6s0Gam54mk
> 
> Related reading:
> 
> The for links below did not cut and paste so you will have to get them from
> the comment seconds of the following playlist:
> 
> Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports:
> http://www.ae911truth.org/images/arti...
> 
> Kevin Ryan: How Science Died at the World Trade Centre:
> http://digwithin.net/2015/02/15/scien...
> 
> Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC Report on the Towers is False:
> http://digwithin.net/2013/09/05/nist-...
> 
> Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False:
> http://digwithin.net/2011/07/09/why-t...
> 
> According to the NIST report, only 14% to 15% of the columns were cut, in
> each of the towers. On page 133 of Glanz and Lipton's book 'City in the Sky'
> they summarise the findings of a white paper by Worthington, Skilling, Helle
> & Jackson White, the Structural Engineers who designed the Twin Towers, as
> follows:
> 
> "The Vierendeel trusses would be so effective, according to the engineers'
> calculations, that all the columns on one side of a tower could be cut, as
> well as the two corners and several columns on the adjacent sides, and the
> tower would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind."
> 
> And in the Engineering News-Record, April 2, 1964:
> 
> "One could cut away all the first-story columns on one side of the building,
> and part way from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building
> could still withstand design live loads and a 100-mph wind force from any
> direction."
> 
> And . . .
> 
> "Live loads on these perimeter columns can be increased more than 2,000%
> before failure occurs."
> 
> And in regard the the plane impacts, from the NIST report - NIST NCSTAR 1-2
> Appendix A (photostats of John Skilling's 3 page paper from 1964, see
> paragraph outlined in box, with red underlining)
> 
>  http://pilotsfor911truth.org/WTC.html
> 
> "The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed
> collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8) travelling at 600
> mph. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local
> damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building
> and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the
> immediate area of the impact."
> 
> And from the Seattle Times, 1993, an interview with John Skilling, Chief
> Structural Engineer of the World Trade Centre . . .
> 
>  http://tinyurl.com/6or8qv
> 
> Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building,
> Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the
> impact of a Boeing 707.
> 
> "Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the
> fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a
> horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building
> structure would still be there."
> 
>  https://youtu.be/zvCuMULutHs?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W



-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, and future Psychotronic World Dominator. 
Master of Remote Viewing. Level 5 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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

#264762

In article <2uidnVX3hN6imEfInZ2dnUU7-fudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

> And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to 
> vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries 
> smoke out of the area.

Like when Chernobyl vented fission byproducts so successfully they were 
completely undetected as far away as northern Europe?

-- 
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.

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

#264846

On 8/23/2015 12:53 PM, je suis charly wrote:
> In article <2uidnVX3hN6imEfInZ2dnUU7-fudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to
>> vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries
>> smoke out of the area.
>
> Like when Chernobyl vented fission byproducts so successfully they were
> completely undetected as far away as northern Europe?
>

two maps;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MU4_bJT8W3Y


Norway still radioactive 26 years after Chernobyl

http://blog.safecast.org/2012/05/en-norway-still-radioactive/

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

#264858 — caught gilber34 in bullshit (was: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys)

"gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message 
news:mrdc2c$u1u$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 8/23/2015 12:53 PM, je suis charly wrote:
>> In article <2uidnVX3hN6imEfInZ2dnUU7-fudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>   "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been 
>>> to
>>> vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries
>>> smoke out of the area.
>>
>> Like when Chernobyl vented fission byproducts so successfully they were
>> completely undetected as far away as northern Europe?
>>
>
> two maps;

ROTFLMAO because the whole world knows that Chernobyl didn't do anything 
about their radiation until way too late.

Where as the mayor of Nuke York City immediately dispatched 120 truckloads 
of treated dirt to Ground Zero to fill in the 3 hypocenters and try to 
conceal the fact that we nuked ourselves on 9/11.  Hear what he said with 
the following:
 http://drjudywood.com/media/010912_GIulianiDumpTrucks.mp3

And then look at one of the places that treated or special dirt was used 
because it was used right on top of the hypocenter that was under WTC3 and 
that was where the nuke was that vaporized WTC1 and left the Surviving 
Corner of WTC1 furthest from the hypocenter under where WTC3 stood.  <G>
 http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2009/05/covering-ground-zero-with-dirt.html

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

#264861 — Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> ROTFLMAO because the whole world knows that Chernobyl didn't do anything 
> about their radiation until way too late.
> 
> Where as the mayor of Nuke York City immediately dispatched 120 truckloads 
> of treated dirt to Ground Zero to fill in the 3 hypocenters and try to 
> conceal the fact that we nuked ourselves on 9/11.  Hear what he said with 
> the following:

Yet more raving nonsense from the retarded kook.

The facts are some airliners were hijacked.

Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
almost 2 hours later.

One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

Everything else is kook babble.

That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.

That there is missing rubble is kook babble.

That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.

That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.

That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
devices is kook babble.

That there was an EMP is kook babble.

That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.

That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
to do with what happened is kook babble.

That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.

That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
or Nagasaki is kook babble.

That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
is kook babble.

That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance 
and still be expected to work is kook babble.

That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
bombs is kook babble.

That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.

That all the video was CGI is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
windows is kook babble.

That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.

That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
is kook babble.

There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.

Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
that can be detected anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the 
collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the Pentagon
and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
kook babble.

Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.


<snip remaining kook babble>


>  http://drjudywood.com/media/010912_GIulianiDumpTrucks.mp3
> 
> And then look at one of the places that treated or special dirt was used 
> because it was used right on top of the hypocenter that was under WTC3 and 
> that was where the nuke was that vaporized WTC1 and left the Surviving 
> Corner of WTC1 furthest from the hypocenter under where WTC3 stood.  <G>
>  http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2009/05/covering-ground-zero-with-dirt.html
> 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#264864 — Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit (was: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys)

In article <NvqdnWK4fq8JoEfInZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

> ROTFLMAO because the whole world knows that Chernobyl didn't do anything 
> about their radiation until way too late.
> 
> Where as the mayor of Nuke York City immediately dispatched 120 truckloads 
> of treated dirt to Ground Zero to fill in the 3 hypocenters and try to 
> conceal the fact that we nuked ourselves on 9/11.  Hear what he said with 
> the following:

The WTC was nuclear device chimney but no hot gas bearing radisotopes made it up 
the chimney? Why did they bother with a chimney?

-- 
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.

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

#264865 — Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit

On 8/23/2015 4:41 PM, Rocky wrote:
> "gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:mrdc2c$u1u$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>> On 8/23/2015 12:53 PM, je suis charly wrote:
>>> In article <2uidnVX3hN6imEfInZ2dnUU7-fudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>    "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been
>>>> to
>>>> vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries
>>>> smoke out of the area.
>>>
>>> Like when Chernobyl vented fission byproducts so successfully they were
>>> completely undetected as far away as northern Europe?
>>>
>>
>> two maps;
>
> ROTFLMAO because the whole world knows that Chernobyl didn't do anything
> about their radiation until way too late.

Liar,  radiation burst out immediatly through the containment shield and 
spread into Europe on the winds in a day.

>
> Where as the mayor of Nuke York City immediately dispatched 120 truckloads
> of treated dirt to Ground Zero to fill in

Liar, 120 truckloads is about 600 cubic yards of dirt, enough to fill 
the twin towers to the depth of only 2 inches !

you need a few thousand more trucks, and do the MATH first please!


<snip raving K0Ok drivialings>

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

#264874 — Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit

"gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message 
news:mrdg6e$8al$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>
> Liar, 120 truckloads is about 600 cubic yards of dirt, enough to fill the 
> twin towers to the depth of only 2 inches !

It didn't have to fill the Twin Towers because the Hypocenter was under the 
side of WTC3 closest to WTC1 and not only did that nuke leave a "Surviving 
Corner" on the far side of WTC1 it also left a "Surviving Corner" on the far 
side of WTC3 just like an NCD would do.  See:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg


> you need a few thousand more trucks, and do the MATH first please!

It is you who needs to get the correct location.  Again, the black or 
treated dirt marks the spot of the covered up hypocenter that was under 
WTC3.
 http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2009/05/covering-ground-zero-with-dirt.html

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

#264880 — Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit

On 8/23/2015 5:22 PM, Rocky wrote:
> "gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:mrdg6e$8al$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>
>> Liar, 120 truckloads is about 600 cubic yards of dirt, enough to fill the
>> twin towers to the depth of only 2 inches !
>
> It didn't have to fill the Twin Towers because the Hypocenter was under the
> side of WTC3

no it was not, and there is no such thing as "hypocenter"


> closest to WTC1 and not only did that nuke

liar, no radiation => no nuke



>
>> you need a few thousand more trucks, and do the MATH first please!
>
> It is you who needs to get the correct location.


wrong, if a nuke went off in Manhattan, the modern world would know 
about it in less than a day, war would be declared.

who ever is feeding you this crap, likes to feed you poo, and watch you 
eat it, like a gullible as a 3 year old.

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

#264892 — caught gilber34 in even more bullshit

"gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message 
news:mrdkg3$hfu$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 8/23/2015 5:22 PM, Rocky wrote:
>> "gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>> news:mrdg6e$8al$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>
>>> Liar, 120 truckloads is about 600 cubic yards of dirt, enough to fill 
>>> the
>>> twin towers to the depth of only 2 inches !
>>
>> It didn't have to fill the Twin Towers because the Hypocenter was under 
>> the
>> side of WTC3
>
> no it was not, and there is no such thing as "hypocenter"

bullshit.  See:
 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocenter
and read where it states: "the point on the earth's surface directly below 
the center of a nuclear bomb explosion"

>> closest to WTC1 and not only did that nuke
>
> liar, no radiation => no nuke

bullshit again and that is what I'm going to prove next and I'll even let 
you know the facts are in the following video:  But you will not know where 
to look.  <G>

Radiological Cleanup on ground zero - This video is dedicated to Dimitri 
Khalezov
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9npQPZh2po

> wrong, if a nuke went off in Manhattan, the modern world would know about 
> it in less than a day, war would be declared.

War against who or whom?  Just people that didn't have Central Banks?  But 
we did that already with Afghanistan and Iraq.

And oddly enough Iran still does not have a Central Bank but Bush was 
stopped from wagging against them for some unknown reason.  I wonder if has 
anything to do with the fact that Iran is on record for bringing down two 
drones without crashing them.  <G>

> who ever is feeding you this crap, likes to feed you poo, and watch you 
> eat it, like a gullible as a 3 year old.

ROTFLMAO when it was too obvious that no commercial airlines crashed at the 
Pentagon or at Pranksville PA. so to me you are the one eating bullshit and 
I can see from above that you are dishing out the bullshit you ate too.

Stay tuned for how we know there was plenty of radiation at Ground Zero.

Rocky 

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

#264893 — Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit

In article <8PmdnRRtaN3f8UfInZ2dnUU7-N2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

> and read where it states: "the point on the earth's surface directly below 
> the center of a nuclear bomb explosion"

Since you say the explosion was below the surface how can a point on the surface 
be below that?

-- 
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.

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

#264895 — Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit

"je suis charly" <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> wrote in message 
news:charlie-gordon1492-FBC75E.18074823082015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu...
> In article <8PmdnRRtaN3f8UfInZ2dnUU7-N2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> and read where it states: "the point on the earth's surface directly 
>> below
>> the center of a nuclear bomb explosion"
>
> Since you say the explosion was below the surface how can a point on the 
> surface
> be below that?

Obviously the explosions went above the surface to vaporize the WTC1, WTC2, 
WTC3 and WTC4 the way they did.  See:
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Rocky 

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

#264896 — Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit

In article <ua-dnXAfZ_5h7EfInZ2dnUU7-UednZ2d@giganews.com>,
 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

> "je suis charly" <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> wrote in message 
> news:charlie-gordon1492-FBC75E.18074823082015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu...
> > In article <8PmdnRRtaN3f8UfInZ2dnUU7-N2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> and read where it states: "the point on the earth's surface directly 
> >> below
> >> the center of a nuclear bomb explosion"
> >
> > Since you say the explosion was below the surface how can a point on the 
> > surface
> > be below that?
> 
> Obviously the explosions went above the surface to vaporize the WTC1, WTC2, 
> WTC3 and WTC4 the way they did.  See:

Do me a favor and announce when you have finally decided whether it was above or 
below ground.

-- 
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.

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

#264904 — Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> Obviously the explosions went above the surface to vaporize the WTC1, WTC2, 
> WTC3 and WTC4 the way they did.  See:

No nukes, fuckwit.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a huge and unique seismic
signature that can be detected by a seismograph anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 by any
seismograph anywhere in the world but the collapse of the two towers
as well as the crashes at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were detected
by nearby seismographs as the slight disturbances (less than 2 on the
Richter scale) that rational people would expect from such events.

A 1 kiloton explosion registers at about 4 on the Richter scale, a
fact that is widely known and trivial to verify.

Seismographs are trivial to make and since the invention of the PC it
has been trivial to record, store and analyze seismic data.

Real time seismic data from around the world is publicly available
on the Internet from many government, academic, and private sources.

Such data is not controlled by anyone; not the media and not any
governmental agency.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/seismic/WTC_PENT_KIM.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#264913 — Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit

On 8/23/2015 8:24 PM, Rocky wrote:
> "je suis charly" <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> wrote in message

>> Since you say the explosion was below the surface how can a point on the
>> surface
>> be below that?
>
> Obviously the explosions went above the surface to vaporize the WTC1, WTC2,
> WTC3 and WTC4 the way they did.  See:

<snip crap>

so where is the radiation, dim bulb ?

>
> Rocky
>
>

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

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.conspiracy

csiph-web