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

Groups > sci.physics > #515831

Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 15:07:28 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Rocky, in <news:ZbCdnczsqY8TP0XInZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@giganews.com>
> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus"  
>> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
>> wrote in message >
>
>>>>> The FBI didn't say Barbara Olson didn't speak to Ted Olson, you
>>>>> retarded fuckwit.
>
>> Th<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
> Snipping out the evidence that you're a delusional retard won't
> do you any good, nor will it ameliorate your psychosis, Ko0K.
>
> I quote the FBI:
> "57. The records available for the phone calls from American 77
> do not allow for a determination of which of four 'connected
> calls to unknown numbers' represent the two between Barbara and
> Ted Olson, although the FBI and DOJ believe that all four
> represent communications between Barbara Olson and her husband's
> office (all family members of the Flight 77 passengers and crew
> were canvassed to see if they had received any phone calls from
> the hijacked flight, and only Renee May's parents and Ted Olson
> indicated that they had received such calls). The four calls were
> at 9:15:34 for 1 minute, 42 seconds; 9:20:15 for 4 minutes, 34
> seconds; 9:25:48 for 2 minutes, 34 seconds; and 9:30:56 for 4
> minutes, 20 seconds.
> FBI report,"American Airlines Airphone Usage," Sept. 20, 2001;
> FBI report of investigation, interview of Theodore Olson, Sept.
> 11, 2001; FBI report of investigation, interview of Helen Voss,
> Sept. 14, 2001; AAL response to the Commission's supplemental
> document request, Jan. 20, 2004. Footnote 57 to Chapter 1, 9/11
> Commission Report"
>
> Notice especially the text blurb "the FBI and DOJ believe that
> all four represent communications between Barbara Olson and her
> husband's office", you fucking delusional little monkey.
>
> Kook. LOL
>
>>> Plane parts from a 757 were found inside
>
>> True<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
> Good of you to finally clear the fog from your befuddled brain
> long enough to admit that no missile hit the Pentagon, you
> delusional fucktard.
>
> As to your other k'lame, claims without proof can be dismissed
> without evidence... your k'lame that vegetation from Brazil was
> found on the Flight 77 plane parts is yet another manufactured
> factoid from a broken brain.
>
> Kook. LOL
>
>>> and outside the Pentagon
>
>> Bu<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
> No full engine was found, you delusional fuckwit. They found bits
> and pieces of both engines. Stop blathering on about your fucking
> delusion and get back on your meds, you brain-damaged fuckwit.
>
> Kook. LOL
>
>>> including the black box for the flight in question.
>
>> RO<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
> <http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf>
>
> <https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf>
> ==============================
> Some time ago one of the authors, Warren Stutt, who independently
> received a copy of the FDR file as a result of his FOIA request,
> discovered more data at the end of the file which had not
> previously been decoded. He recently managed to decode the last
> frame and has made the information freely available. The file
> contains a vast amount of data, including the following essential
> information: the vertical acceleration every eighth of a second;
> longitudinal acceleration, roll angle and pitch every quarter of
> a second; air speed, ground speed, pressure altitude, radio
> height, heading and position every second; all finishing at
> points within the last second. The last time stated in the file
> is 9:37:49, which is in the 4th last subframe. Three more
> subframes were recorded, one second each, bringing the time of
> the last recording to 9:37:52, 6 or 8 seconds later than the two
> official times of impact.
> ==============================
>
> You'll note the graph of Pitch, Roll and Wheel on page 5 of that
> report proves that the plane had pitched *down* in the last 2
> seconds prior to impact. At no time from 5 seconds out was the
> pitch steep enough to pull the plane up and over the building. At
> the last 2 seconds or so, the amount of pitch required at that
> speed to pull the plane up and over the building would have
> induced stresses of over 5 g upward force to get the plane up
> over the building at that speed, and that would have literally
> ripped the wings off the plane. That's nearly twice what the
> plane is designed to withstand.
>
> "As already mentioned, it has been asserted by one group that it
> would be impossible for the plane to survive pull-up after
> passing over the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)
> radio antenna tower, as it would require a wing loading of over
> 10.14g. This claim is, however, easily shown to be incorrect. It
> results from an unfounded assumption that the plane would have
> traveled in a straight line from the tower to the first light
> pole before commencing the pull-up. The graph above (Fig. 14)
> shows that this assumption is not justified, as a strong g-force
> commences at about 2 seconds prior to impact, while the first
> pole is not hit until about 1.3 seconds prior to impact. Also
> their calculation has been shown to contain a large mathematical
> error, which more than doubles the force required."
>
> The strong g-forces mentioned were merely the pilot trying to
> level the plane after rapidly descending from ~2000 feet while
> accelerating 60 kpm beyond the plane's rated dive speed and
> trying to deal with wing flutter. Momentum at that speed is a
> bitch.
>
> You'll note the graphs on page 6 and 11 showing true altitude of
> the plane. At no time did it pull up, it's true altitude
> continued to drop up until impact. And it was accelerating as it
> dove. Once the plane got close enough that ground effect provided
> buoyancy to the plane, the pilot simply held slight down flaps
> and steered toward his target. Final pitch was -1.2 degrees.
>
> "This analysis clearly shows that the claim that the FDR file
> provides evidence that the plane was too high to hit the Pentagon
> is without foundation. It is true that the altimeter indicated
> that the plane was too high but the radio height system did not.
> Based on the data and analysis presented above, there is no
> reason to distrust radio height but there is ample reason to
> distrust the altimeter on descent at low altitudes, especially at
> very high speeds."
>
> IOW, they have two altitude measurement systems. Radio altitude,
> which is highly accurate at low altitudes and is used for
> landings, and the altimeter, which is used for cruising (it is
> less accurate, but an accuracy of +-50 feet isn't a problem at
> cruise altitude) because the radio altitude is inaccurate at high
> altitudes. The altimeter is set to read elevation at the take-off
> airport, so it was set to ground level and atmospheric pressure
> at Dulles. Thus the discrepancy between ground level and
> altimeter wasn't a discrepancy at all... the altimeter "thought"
> ground level was at Dulles' 312 feet.
>
> "The data file recorded the altitude of the plane on the ground
> at Dulles, from where the final flight began, as 40 feet.
> Atmospheric pressure at the time was 1023.23 hPa and temperature
> was 18 C, 3 degrees above standard temperature. If the pressure
> and temperature difference from standard atmosphere is allowed
> for, calculation shows the displayed altitude would rise 272
> feet, reaching 312 feet, which is the published elevation for
> Dulles International Airport. The adjustment may be confirmed
> using this calculator:
> http://www.luizmonteiro.com/Learning_ALT_Errors_Sim.aspx
> It is therefore apparent that the data file recorded raw altitude
> at Dulles in terms of standard pressure and that no error was
> present at the time."
>
> You fucking idiot. Get back on your meds.
>
> "The recent complete decoding of the FDR file has enlarged and
> clarified the information available and has thereby enabled
> resolution of the contradictions. It is clear that this file
> supports the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and
> the consequent impact with the Pentagon. The file thus also
> supports the majority of eyewitness reports."
>
> Kook. LOL
>
>>> That your broken brain can't accept reality is nothing more than
>>> proof of how broken it is.
>
>> ROT<SMACKAKOOK!>
>
> Delusional frothtards who are so clue-repellant that they snip
> out all evidence of their psychosis will continue to have their
> stupid slobbering mouths slapped shut each time they open their
> toothless maws to bawl out more bullshit, until such time as they
> are able to concisely explain exactly how their kooky conspiracy
> theory is able to violate several laws of physics.
>
>> Rocky
>
> Now, get to addressing the 16 ways your kook conspiracy theory
> violates the laws of physics:
>
> ======================================================
> 1) Your estimation of the time between detonation and the time of
> collapse puts the nukes between from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep
> below the towers, a depth we don't even have the technology to
> drill to today, let alone back in 1968. Not to mention the fact
> that at that depth, the temperature is so high things like metal
> *melt*. That's *why* we can't drill much deeper than the 7.636
> miles of the Al Shaheen oil well in Qatar (the deepest hole
> *ever* dug in human history)... the equipment fails. That's why
> the Kola Superdeep Borehole was abandoned at 7.619 miles deep.
>
> 2) The claimed "EMP pulse" in the video *you* provided wasn't an
> EMP pulse at all, it was satellite uplink interference. If it'd
> been a nuke EMP (especially one sized 150 kt), the nanosecond
> time frame of the explosion (and thus the sharp peak of the EMP)
> would have caused the camera's electronics to burn out. No amount
> of shielding would have been sufficient to prevent that. That
> there is video of the immediate aftermath proves there was no
> nuke, especially one sized your claimed 150 kt, which would have
> destroyed all electronics for dozens of miles radius.
>
> 3) The radiation experienced was of such short duration that
> there's no way it was neutron or gamma bombardment from a nuke.
> If it had been from a nuke the metal in the buildings would have
> shown high levels of radioactivity for decades. It was most
> likely the tritium in the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement
> weapon sights that was the source. You didn't specify what type
> of radiation was experienced, and I doubt you're smart or
> educated enough to even know what types of radiation there are.
>
> 4) No nuclear detonation byproducts were found at the WTC complex
> or anywhere in NYC. They found tritium from the aircraft exit
> signs and law enforcement weapons sites, radium from industrial
> sources unrelated to nuclear weapons and background levels for
> all other sources of radiation.
>
> 5) The seismic waves caused by a small 150 kt nuke wouldn't be
> sufficient to drop the buildings, it'd barely even be felt by
> people in the vicinity, especially with the bombs buried, as you
> k'lamed, from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep. It would take on the
> order of 2 MEGAtons to do so, especially at the depths you k'lame
> the bombs were buried.
>
> 6) The trigger that sets off the nuclear explosion is a neutron
> source. It naturally decays over time, and its decay byproducts,
> the elements the neutron source transmutes into as it decays,
> include xenon, which is a neutron absorber. It's called xenon
> poisoning. Any bomb that has sat for 33 years without its trigger
> being replenished will not have a trigger that is viable to start
> any sort of nuclear chain reaction.
>
> 7) I've provided a video from *inside* one of the towers *as*
> *it* *was* *collapsing*, showing the vibration from the buckling
> vertical support column and *NO* EMP:
> ======================
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xYjoSvzWeo>
> You'll note the massive shaking from the central support column
> buckling, but *NO* EMP. And that was INSIDE the WTC tower. No
> amount of shielding would have saved that camera from a nuke EMP.
> ======================
>
> 8) Why aren't you explaining how those supposed nukes were going
> to survive at a depth of 37.28 miles (where the temperature would
> be approximately 960 degrees F) to 96.93 miles (where the
> temperature would be approximately 1840 degrees F), Ko0K?
>
> 9) Explain how a nuclear weapon can direct its explosion through
> a hole without any of the compressive blast going out into
> surrounding rock.
>
> 10) Explain how 19 nukes (according to you, another leap of logic
> taken by your broken brain to explain away the 19 instances of
> satellite uplink interference in the video *you* provided) were
> detonated at the WTC complex in rapid succession, yet no ill
> effects were experienced by electronics, the electrical grid or
> aircraft.
>
> 11) Explain why you're now saying there were 34 nukes
> (MID:<345fee8b286a91037bc806ed589d182d@dizum.com>), as opposed to
> your previously k'lamed 19 nukes (and your previously, previously
> k'lamed 3 nukes)... would it be because your broken little brain
> is squirming under the scorching twin beams of truth and reality,
> screaming in agony at its being forced to see just how delusional
> it truly is? While you're at it, get to explaining how the
> regular rad sweeps (radiological surveys) at the twin towers
> (because the space was primarily rented by government agencies)
> showed no nukes or any contamination whatsoever, and how 34 nukes
> were obtained and put in place without drawing any attention
> whatsoever.
>
> 12) Why aren't you explaining how the personnel sent down to
> service those nukes (because now that you know the neutron-source
> triggers for nuclear weapons require replacement on a periodic
> basis, your broken brain *had* to construct an entire base at
> 37.28 to 96.93 miles deep (far deeper than we have the technology
> to dig even today, let alone back in 1968), complete with "4
> blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area
> the nukes were maintained", or your brain would have been forced
> to admit it was wrong when it told you those nukes sat untouched
> for 33 years and maintained their viability) are supposed to
> survive in 960 to 1840 degree heat?
>
> 13) You admitted (ed75e9d6f7ccf7296c075fd695673a37@dizum.com)
> that all the materials used in construction of the twin towers
> (all 1.5 million tons of it) had been accounted for and trucked
> off to the Fresh Kills landfill. How will you reconcile your
> admission with your kook blather that significant percentages of
> the buildings "vaporized" (your word) and "floated toward Europe"
> (your words)?
>
> 14) Why can't you provide proof of the nuclear explosion seismic
> signatures for these 19 nukes (now 34 nukes, per your latest
> k'lame) you k'lame were detonated at the WTC site on 11 Sep 2001?
>
> 15) Where were the vertically-directed plumes of dust and debris
> kicked up from your claimed nuclear weapons being detonated deep
> underground, Ko0K?
>
> 16) Explain how these 19 nukes (now 34 nukes per your latest
> k'lame) could tunnel holes from their underground installation
> 37.28 to 96.93 miles deep, to directly under the WTC complex...
> in 12 seconds... through solid bedrock... prior to detonating
> directly below the WTC towers (which, of course, fucks up your
> timing between the detonations and the collapses, leading you
> back to where your delusion started. Congratulations, Dimwit,
> you've made the full circuit on The Island of Insanity. Now go
> 'round again.).
> ======================================================
>
> There are now 16 ways your kook konspiracy theory violates the
> laws of physics... now you'd better get to work addressing each
> one, point by point, or people are gonna know you're just a
> retard who can't grasp simple physics.
>
> Kook. LOL
>

tell him about how the gubbament is out to get you, kemtrailK0ok!

obliterate some more irony meters!  :)

-- 
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

--

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

Thread

Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 19:57 +0200
  Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-20 17:09 -0500
    Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 20:59 -0500
    Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 05:10 +0200
      Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-21 08:24 -0500
        Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-08-21 15:23 +0000
        Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 20:53 +0200
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 16:12 -0500
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 16:13 -0500
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 08:09 +1000
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:08 -0500
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-21 17:01 -0500
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 17:12 -0700
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 09:58 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 08:15 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 10:23 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-08-22 16:47 +0100
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 12:48 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 12:45 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 12:47 -0500
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 08:10 +0200
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 11:27 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-08-22 17:38 +0100
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-22 16:49 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-22 17:51 -0400
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-22 23:29 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 20:28 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:16 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 09:11 +0100
                2 T-Annoy find your own evidence (was: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 05:51 -0500
                Re: 2 T-Annoy find your own evidence Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 12:15 +0100
                Re: 2 T-Annoy proves he is an asshole (was find your own evidence) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 07:26 -0500
                Re: 2 T-Annoy proves he is an asshole (was find your own evidence) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 07:38 -0500
                Re: 2 T-Annoy proves he is an asshole (was find your own evidence) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 07:40 -0500
                Re: 2 T-Annoy proves he is an asshole (was find your own evidence) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 17:45 +0100
                T-Annoy proves he is still an asshole (was find your own evidence) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 11:59 -0500
                Re: T-Annoy proves he is still an asshole (was find your own evidence) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 18:19 +0100
                T-Annoy proves he is still a big asshole (was find your own evidence) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 12:45 -0500
                Re: T-Annoy proves he is still a big asshole (was find your own evidence) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:10 +0000
                Jim proves he can't see people impeach themselves  "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 13:29 -0500
                Re: Jim proves he can't see people impeach themselves jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:33 +0000
                Re: Jim proves he can't see people impeach themselves "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 14:06 -0500
                Re: Jim proves he can't see people impeach themselves je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 13:31 -0700
                Re: 2 T-Annoy find your own evidence (was: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:47 -0500
                Caught Kent in a BIG LIE (was: 2 T-Annoy find your own evidence (was: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit)) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 07:14 -0500
                Re: Caught Kent in a BIG LIE (was: 2 T-Annoy find your own evidence (was: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit)) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 08:39 -0500
                Re: Caught Kent in a BIG LIE (was: 2 T-Annoy find your own evidence Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 15:00 +0100
                Re: Caught Kent in a BIG LIE jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 17:00 +0000
                Re: 2 T-Annoy find your own evidence jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 16:58 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:47 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 06:46 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 12:50 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 21:07 +0200
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "\"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> - 2015-08-22 15:11 -0400
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 22:57 +0200
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-08-22 21:17 +0100
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-22 14:42 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-08-22 22:58 +0100
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 00:43 +0200
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 00:16 +0200
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:07 -0500
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 06:05 +0200
        Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 16:12 -0500
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 01:16 -0500
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:10 -0500
  Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-20 17:35 -0500
    Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 20:59 -0500
    Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 05:37 +0200
      Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-21 08:41 -0500
        Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 06:55 -0700
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-21 07:40 -0700
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-21 16:34 -0500
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 14:45 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-21 16:52 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-21 22:53 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-22 08:42 -0400
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 09:20 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 09:53 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 12:47 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 13:16 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:34 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 14:06 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 11:13 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-22 18:02 +0100
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 17:12 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-21 21:36 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:07 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:06 -0500
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 05:06 -0500
        Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 10:03 -0400
        Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 20:17 +0200
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 20:59 -0500
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 19:07 -0700
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-08-23 09:07 +0100
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 06:08 +0200
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 21:22 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-22 21:31 -0700
              Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut:  (was: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 10:43 -0500
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 17:01 +0000
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut: Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 19:38 +0200
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut again: "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 13:08 -0500
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut again: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:35 +0000
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut again: "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 14:05 -0500
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut again: Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-23 13:06 -0700
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut again: Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 21:47 +0200
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut again: "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 12:59 -0700
                Re: Breaking news for the Friendly Neighborhood Nut:  (was: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 11:38 -0700
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 05:19 +0000
        Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 16:10 -0500
          Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-22 10:43 -0500
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 12:49 -0500
            Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-08-23 04:44 +0000
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Checkmate <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-22 21:55 -0700
              Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 06:27 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 07:24 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-23 09:56 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 12:08 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-23 10:46 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 12:59 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 18:14 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 14:02 -0400
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-23 17:02 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-08-27 19:21 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-27 15:39 -0500
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 14:05 -0700
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-27 21:10 +0000
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) "\"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 18:17 -0400
                Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-28 06:31 +0200
                Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) "\"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> - 2015-08-28 13:54 -0400
                Re: Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-29 04:42 +0200
                Re: Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 04:09 +0000
                Re: Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-29 18:12 +0200
                Re: Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) "\"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> - 2015-08-31 03:17 -0400
                Re: Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 14:17 -0700
                Re: Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) "\"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> - 2015-08-31 03:16 -0400
                Re: Proof that snickerTurds can't quite grok logic WAS: Re: The FBI's report about 9/11/01 proves the box cutter bullshit was just bullshit (MM is BS 2) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 17:17 +0200
                box cutters were not illegal, at that time noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-28 12:27 -0700

csiph-web