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


Groups > sci.physics > #520084

Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes

From Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
References <d12d7aa3-573c-4251-b1c4-f0349617876b@googlegroups.com> <8n41va569bj7hnr3qh73nhcbpa7r213t9b@4ax.com>
Subject Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes
Message-ID <797d2f8d58377a54665c64d2e8e2d489@dizum.com> (permalink)
Date 2015-09-10 09:01 +0200
Newsgroups alt.astronomy, alt.conspiracy, alt.usenet.kooks, sci.physics
Organization dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Topaz, in <news:8n41va569bj7hnr3qh73nhcbpa7r213t9b@4ax.com> did thusly
jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> http://911planeshoax.com/

That site promulgates some of the most retarded of the conspiracy
theories concerning 9/11. If you wish to learn what really happened,
it'll take engaging your brain and learning building engineering,
flight kinetics and physics... very few of you kooks are up to the
task, for obvious reasons.

<snicker>

> In the impact videos, notably the Hezarkhani, Luc Courchesne, Spiegel
> TV and Evan Fairbanks videos we see what we are told is a plane
> cartoonishly pass through the steel face of the tower like a ghost. As
> the alleged plane makes contact with the tower there is no bending,
> buckling or breaking of the plane. No wings breaking or other parts of
> the plane breaking apart. This is impossible. It is cartoon physics.
> It melts into the side of the tower like a knife through butter.
> 
>  http://imageshack.com/a/img850/7038/rma9.gif A passenger jet is a
> hollow aluminum and plastic tube which is highly vulnerable to impacts
> with flying birds. http://imageshack.com/a/img89/3552/u9a4.jpg The
> "plane" we are told is Flight 175 is depicted as being simultaneously
> both half in the South Tower and still completely intact, a pair of
> buildings made with 200,000 tons of steel each.
> 
>  http://imageshack.com/a/img191/2404/hmxt.jpg When the tip of the
> plane's fuselage hits the steel exterior of the South Tower the
> fuselage should be breaking up.
> http://imageshack.com/a/img713/3572/e7m.gif That would cause the wings
> to break off.

Except for that darned kinetic energy that all you kooks seem to
forget about. LOL

> From the holes left in both towers after "impact" we are supposed to
> believe the wings sliced clean through the 14 inch steel beams but
> this is simply impossible. The fragile mostly hollow aluminum wings
> would not slice through all the 14 inch steel box columns of the WTC
> towers and leave a Wylie Coyote style hole.

At least you listen to reason... before you were k'laming the girders
to be 14" solid steel. Now at least you know they were 14" boxes
constructed of flat plate steel welded together into an empty square
box girder. As the building height rose, the grade and thickness of
steel went down. Near the top, they used A36 steel only 1/4" thick to
construct the box girders. Where the planes hit, it was likely only
5/16" thick. So in actuality, the plane was really only punching
through a grand total of 5/8" of steel. And that rather thin steel was
spaced at intervals of 6' 8". So there really wasn't a lot of steel up
there. The amount of steel the plane had to punch through was less
than that found in an average full-sized car... and I can assure you,
in any crash contest between plane and car, car would lose every time.
Using physics, it was found the critical velocity to severe the box
girders was 155 m/s. The planes were traveling over 200 m/s. Therefore
the wing would easily cut through the outer truss frame, even had they
been constructed of weaker material... unfortunately for your kooky
conspiracy theory, as I prove below, the wings were actually
*stronger* than the structural steel of the WTC towers.

After you've let that bit of reality soak through your thick skull,
research the Empire State Building airplane crash... a 10-ton (vs. the
197.5 tons of each of the B-767s that hit the WTC towers) Mitchell
B-25 bomber at only 200 MPH (a much lower speed than that of the
planes hitting the WTC towers). The B-25 was not as strongly built as
modern aircraft, it crashed into the Empire State Building, one wing
penetrated, one sheared off. The Empire State Building was a
grid-constructed building of *much* stronger construction than the WTC
towers. And that plane ripped a hole right through that building's
outer wall (in fact,the main fuselage impact hole was spread over two
floors, so the plane ripped through the flooring structural steel and
concrete, as well as the outer wall structural steel and concrete) and
in fact some parts went right through the entire building, there are
pictures of some of the plane hanging out the other side of the
building. The Empire State Building stood because it had asbestos
fireproofing, plentiful structural concrete (and thus a greater
capacity to absorb the heat of the fire), and was of the much stronger
grid construction.

Then after you've let that bit of reality sink in, consider the
Japanese Kamikaze planes of WWII. They were able to dive-bomb on
battleships and cut through the 1 to 2 inch thick solid steel plates
on those battleships.
<http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/dafs/APA/apa120-brief.html>

Now, as for your blather about softer materials being unable to punch
through harder materials:

A spud gun, with a PVC and duct tape "bullet", punches through the
steel of a car, leaving a "road runner" cutout in the metal. The
"bullet" remained intact:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP8oCvacvAg>

A pumpkin, shot from an air cannon at ~400 MPH. Several shots, the
pumpkins go through a fiberglass boat, and two cars.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RryMwlrA4G8>

A pumpkin through a van:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=didpjwBgFqY&>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Gfrfzpp8l0&>

We all know water is far too soft and pliable to cut through something
as strong as steel, right? Except not right:
<http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/question553.htm>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-E7u0LNUpO4>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPYwrFwQrN4>

A ping pong ball, fired through a plastic ping pong paddle:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc-zmb3jAgo>

A ping pong ball, fired through a plastic ping pong paddle:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pU7StKm8t9E>

A ping pong ball, fired through a plywood ping pong paddle:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV4xVAYCK8Q>

A fucking *marshmallow* certainly wouldn't be able to punch through
plywood, right? Nah! No way...
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASf5cX7Z2-4&>

A fragile bicycle wheel, which dents if you so much as hop a curb
wrong, couldn't possibly completely smash the front end of a car yet
remain intact, right?
<https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/car-vs-bike.jpg?w=150&h=112>

Ferchristsake, *straw* can't embed itself into a tree, right?! Yeah,
it can... with enough speed:
<http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/mythbusters-database/can-hurricane-winds-blow-straw-through-tree-trunk/>

An old vinyl record certainly would just smash itself into a million
pieces if it hit a telephone pole, right?
<http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/includes/columns/community/2006/wea00226s.jpg>

As long as there is sufficient kinetic energy, softer materials can
punch through harder materials. Given the low mass at the wing tips,
it's required to use trim weights to avoid wing flutter... commercial
aircraft earlier than the Boeing 747-400 used depleted uranium, newer
aircraft use sintered tungsten... as much as 1.5 tons of it. The
reason the wings were able to punch through the relatively thin metal
of the box girders (aside from the fact that the metal in the wings is
actually *stronger* than the metal of the WTC towers) is because of
that trim weight.

>  http://imageshack.com/a/img607/1741/a68j.jpg An airplane wing can be
> sliced in half by a wooden telephone pole:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zt1oTYhcgo Aluminum plane wings will
> not cut through 14 inch steel regardless of speed and weight.

The aluminum used in aircraft wings isn't the soft shit found in soda
cans, you nong. It's Aluminum 2219-T81, precipitation-hardened, with a
tensile strength equal to that of structural steel, and a superior
yield strength.

<http://www.aircraftmaterials.com/data/aluminium/2219.html>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A36_steel>
===========================================================
Aluminum 2219-T81 tensile strength: 58 ksi
Aluminum 2219-T81 yield strength: 43 ksi

Structural steel tensile strength: 58 ksi
Structural steel yield strength: 36 ksi
===========================================================

Those aircraft wings were *stronger* than the steel in the WTC towers.
And remember, they had kinetic energy on their side, as well.

> Not only
> is it impossible for the wings to have cut through the steel columns
> but it is absolutely impossible for the fragile wing tips to have also
> cut through the steel columns.

If you understood even rudimentary physics, you'd understand that
you're wrong. You'd also understand a great deal more...
unfortunately, you appear to be comfortably ensconced in your
ignorance.

Educate yourself, because the longer you blather on about your wholly
impossible conspiracy theory, the more you prove yourself to be an
uneducated idiot:
<https://kendoc911.wordpress.com/debunking-the-no-plane-theory/disinfo-aluminum-planes-cannot-penetrate-steel-buildings/>

-- 

Roger T.E. Wittekind
PO Box 471
167 40th Avenue
East Moline, IL 61244
309-755-6374
309-755-6394

Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East
Moline, IL.

Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in
trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain
becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate
(which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes
larger and larger leaps of illogic.

For instance:
=============================
A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video
*you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they
must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you
believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed
over the concrete and walked away for 33 years.

B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the
satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and
the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but
kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil
composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never
mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today,
let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your
kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at
some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the
nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was
"dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years".

C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic
replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally
radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon,
which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken
brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the
triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to
change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up,
walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped
the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an
entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service
personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back
into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words).

D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your
original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite
uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you
k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an
EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs,
so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in
rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke
detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out
electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no
nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the
vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC.

E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried
deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up
your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but
somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that
the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that
miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding,
in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that
your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of
*solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL

F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your
broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to
underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first
because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but
for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to
your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite
uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time
the building shook, which is pretty much where we started. So I've
proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of
sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL

G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your
broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a
desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility...
saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath
the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode,
where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive
metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the
vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why
did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not
just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the
WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP")
and the shaking of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole seconds, just
as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL

H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID:
<e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of
widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're
off your meds, Roget Wittekind.

I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're
now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator"
that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no
EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon
proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind.

J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a
"nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your
magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to
silence them.

IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from
reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And
the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little
tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very
best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot
with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even
worked up a sweat yet.
=============================

Kook. LOL

Back to sci.physics | Previous | NextNext in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-10 09:01 +0200
  Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-10 15:44 -0500
    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-10 19:07 -0400
      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-11 15:17 -0500
        Re: Rocky wrong again jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-11 20:38 +0000
        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-11 18:54 -0400
          Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 00:14 -0500
            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 09:11 -0400
              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 08:48 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 10:33 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:02 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 21:46 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:12 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-14 19:24 +0100
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 13:36 -0500
                Re: Rocky still crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 18:54 +0000
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-14 21:19 +0100
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 16:47 -0500
        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:13 -0500
    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 19:31 -0500
      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-11 14:43 -0500
        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-11 17:26 -0500
          Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 03:55 -0500
        Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:09 -0500
    Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-11 06:43 +0200
      Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-11 19:22 +0200
      Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-11 15:34 -0500
        Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-12 06:59 +0200
          Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:34 -0500
            Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-12 11:47 -0500
            Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-13 07:04 +0200
              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 05:34 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-14 06:36 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 15:47 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 17:22 -0400
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 15:43 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 17:34 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-15 17:39 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 19:29 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 09:21 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 08:57 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 15:50 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 20:08 +0000
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 16:43 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 16:51 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 21:10 +0000
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:29 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 17:20 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:26 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 18:34 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 21:41 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:52 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:50 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 00:23 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:42 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"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> - 2015-09-17 01:13 -0400
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:45 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 16:48 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 21:43 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:50 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 06:51 +0200
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:56 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 06:25 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:34 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 07:31 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:09 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 23:00 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:03 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 20:24 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:43 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:01 -0500
                9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:29 +0200
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 15:25 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 14:13 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 13:25 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 17:56 +0000
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:19 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:34 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 17:00 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 17:09 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:40 -0700
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:24 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 10:12 -0400
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:35 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 09:47 -0400
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:44 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:20 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:36 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:11 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 05:09 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 10:47 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:20 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:43 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 21:15 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:12 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:09 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:13 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 22:25 +0000
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:48 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:02 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 15:29 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 18:49 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 00:02 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-21 02:27 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 03:04 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:18 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 21:41 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 00:57 -0400
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 15:17 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 15:59 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:49 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:48 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 15:56 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:18 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 15:21 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 17:05 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:22 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:40 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 13:06 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 16:59 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 21:48 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 16:03 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 07:58 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:30 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 17:58 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 05:23 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 13:38 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:36 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 14:05 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:48 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:48 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-24 09:41 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 13:08 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 17:13 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 21:52 -0400
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 15:46 -0500
                planes thereupon none where noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 18:10 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 16:14 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 08:24 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:47 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:32 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 15:50 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:32 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:06 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:13 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:22 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:33 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:15 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 05:42 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 14:53 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 07:17 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:07 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:42 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 11:24 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:45 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:15 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 05:59 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:38 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 07:02 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:13 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 21:26 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:13 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 21:31 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:31 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:57 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 16:01 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-22 16:19 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:11 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:40 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:11 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:15 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 06:36 +0200
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"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> - 2015-09-17 01:12 -0400
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 06:44 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:39 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:31 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:15 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 22:36 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:14 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 20:04 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:41 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:41 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:17 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 22:11 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:14 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 13:07 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-21 18:25 +0200
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"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> - 2015-09-21 20:27 -0400
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:36 +0200
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"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> - 2015-09-22 10:28 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2015-09-22 17:47 +0100
                9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 2 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-23 05:27 +0200
                9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-23 06:09 +0200
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1 "\"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> - 2015-09-23 20:22 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-24 06:53 +0200
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b "\"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> - 2015-09-24 01:49 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-25 07:33 +0200
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1a Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-24 06:59 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:27 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"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> - 2015-09-17 17:38 -0400
                no asbestos cladding on the main beams noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:38 -0700
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 05:59 +0200
                if the planes were not bombs, or if they were bombs noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 11:21 -0700
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:42 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:36 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:19 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-16 07:48 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-15 04:18 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 15:55 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-15 17:03 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:06 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:38 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:01 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:36 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:07 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:44 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:21 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 05:09 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:20 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:14 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:56 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-22 03:28 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:36 -0500
                9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-16 07:37 +0200
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:42 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:46 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:06 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"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> - 2015-09-17 00:30 -0400
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:38 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-16 17:59 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 07:11 +0200
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 00:05 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-14 17:06 +0200
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 15:57 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 16:31 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 16:06 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 12:09 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:47 -0500
    Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-11 17:20 -0500
      Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:36 -0500
        Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"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> - 2015-09-12 08:02 -0400
          Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 05:42 -0500
            Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-13 04:18 -0700
              Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-13 04:45 -0700
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 16:04 -0500
              Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 16:03 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-14 14:19 -0700
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 16:17 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:06 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:54 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 16:01 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:08 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:02 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 02:12 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 13:33 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 13:45 -0700
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:45 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:46 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:25 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:22 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 11:32 -0500
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Stagger Lee <stag@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 12:40 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Stagger Lee <stag@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 15:28 -0400
                Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 14:10 -0700
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:56 -0500
                Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:19 -0700
  Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 14:04 -0700
  no bombs that were not planes e.g noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 19:24 -0700

csiph-web