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

Groups > sci.physics > #519104 > unrolled thread

Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

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

  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-05 11:50 -0500
    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-05 18:39 +0100
      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-06 11:38 -0400
        Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 11:17 -0500
          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 11:35 -0500
            Re: Rocky incoherent again jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 17:07 +0000
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 13:09 -0500
                Re: Rocky still a delusional stalker jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 18:21 +0000
                  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 13:45 -0500
                    Re: Rocky the stalking lunatic raves on jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 19:26 +0000
                      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (jimp lies about missing debris) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 16:21 -0500
                        Re: Rocky still delusional jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 21:38 +0000
                          Re: Strange Features Found in the Naudet Brothers First Strike Footage (jimp forgets about freeze frame again) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 17:08 -0500
                            Re: Rocky continues to have delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 22:32 +0000
                        Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (jimp lies about missing debris) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:06 -0500
                          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (K proves she lies about Dimitri) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 11:27 -0500
                            Re: Rocky raves on jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 16:34 +0000
                              Re: Rocky raves on "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:45 -0500
                            Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Roger has to lie, per his mental defect(s)) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:44 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 15:01 -0500
                  Re: Rocky still a delusional stalker "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-06 15:38 -0400
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 19:33 -0500
                      Re: Rocky still crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-08 03:34 +0000
            Re: 9/11 building collapses - (Roger is caught lying again.) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 14:55 -0500
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! - (K  is caught bulshitting again.) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 15:26 -0500
                Re: 9/11 building collapses - Why does Roger keep using the same lies? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 16:21 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (test for K the kook) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 18:22 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (test for K the kook) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-07 02:19 +0000
                      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 01:23 -0500
                        Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 01:02 +0000
                          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 20:39 -0500
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - Why is Roger DESPERATE to divert attention from his own claims? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:10 -0500
          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-06 16:15 -0400
            Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 16:22 -0500
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K stop your bickering) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 18:55 -0500
                Re: Rocky's imaginary nukes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 00:29 +0000
                Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K stop your bickering) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:12 -0500
                  Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K poves she is a complete asshole) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 11:42 -0500
                    Re: stalker rocky babbles on jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 16:49 +0000
                    Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!  (K poves she is a complete asshole) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:45 -0500
          Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 10:29 -0400
            Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:44 -0500
              Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 19:11 -0400
    Re: Rocky has more delusions and is still jobless jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-05 18:55 +0000
      Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 03:39 -0500
        Re: Yet more Rocky delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 17:01 +0000

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

#519336 — Re: Rocky still a delusional stalker

jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> "And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to
>> look at the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says
>> CGIs and Nukes."
>
> Here is your preponderance of the evidence, you raving kook.
>
> How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
> recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
> and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
> the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
> recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
> have created?
>
> Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
> organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
> is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
> involved on 9/11.
>
> The raving kook forgets that there were thousands of eye witnesses
> watching things happen as they happened; no CGI anything.
>
>
> <snip remaining kook delusions>





And yet the eywitnesses, who were in Manhattan that day, and didn't see the 
TV news CGI's, said no 757,....but small a windowless (gray) aircraft.

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

But why should we trust eywitnesses ??? 

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

#519666

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
news:msi4jv$uqh$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to
>>> look at the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says
>>> CGIs and Nukes."
>>
>> Here is your preponderance of the evidence, you raving kook.
>>
>> How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
>> recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
>> and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
>> the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
>> recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
>> have created?
>>
>> Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
>> organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
>> is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
>> involved on 9/11.
>>
>> The raving kook forgets that there were thousands of eye witnesses
>> watching things happen as they happened; no CGI anything.
>>
>>
>> <snip remaining kook delusions>
>
>
>
>
>
> And yet the eywitnesses, who were in Manhattan that day, and didn't see 
> the TV news CGI's, said no 757,....but small a windowless (gray) aircraft.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GffVvYFrtPM
>
> But why should we trust eywitnesses ???

Too bad jimp is beyond help.

Not only were there are lot of people that didn't see any jets at all there 
was at least one TV station that would not add a CGI to their video and 
there was even one station that used a ball instead of a jet.  I found that 
ball video when I was looking for what the different networks broadcast 
during the second CGI strike.

Rocky 

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

#519694 — Re: Rocky still crazy

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> Too bad jimp is beyond help.

Well, at least I have never had MY ass hauled into court for stalking,
kook.

> Not only were there are lot of people that didn't see any jets at all there 

Yep, people in Los Angeles didn't see them, people in Huston didn't
see them...

But thousands of people who were in that area of New York on 9/11
did see them.



-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519346 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - (Roger is caught lying again.)

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:35:42 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:ojpouatmgsr2h185it6mq4mlk8af2avoun@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:38:23 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Tony Dragon wrote:
>>>> On 05/09/2015 17:50, Rocky wrote:
>>>>> "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:fnAVl.48267$d36.34889@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>>>>> 9/11 building collapses - it WAS controlled demolition!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The proof? - watch this video:
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
>>>>>
>>>>> WTF?
>>>>>
>>>>> The first thing you have to do is realize the media wants you to think
>>>>> the Twin Towers collapsed to the ground but there is another story.
>>>>
>>>> Will this story be eligible for the Man Booker Prize?
>>>>
>>>>> The fact is the Twin Towers left very little on the ground
>>>>
>>>> Why did this nothing take so many dumptrucks to get rid of it then.
>>>> You know about the dumptrucks, you posted a link about them.
>>>>
>>>>> and the twin towers left lot in the air
>>>>
>>>> So it's still there?
>>>>
>>>>> which are both tell tale signs of a nuclear
>>>>> controlled demolition.
>>>>
>>>> Well as there was no ncd the above is incorrect.
>>>>
>>>>> And the lack of any radiation reading prove they were never published.
>>>>>
>>>> But the link about radiation has been posted, and you have told us about
>>>> Geiger counters going off.
>>>> You really should remember what you yourself posted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> And even though the North Tower shook like a tuning fork for a few
>>>>> seconds before it was vaporized the fact seismic data didn't show the
>>>>> North Tower shaking proves the seismic records were as bogus as the
>>>>> jets were.
>>>>
>>>> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
>>>> the whole world about these nukes.
>>>>
>>>> Can you explain that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US dollar 
>>>as their base currency.
>>
>>     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
>> referred to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.
>


Before anyone else can point out my error, the Yuan Renminbi is
referred to simply as the Yuan. 

I apologize for my error.


>Too bad that happened after the great 9/11 hoax where they used CGIs instead 
>of jets and nukes instead of jet fuel.  <G>
>

     China has used the Yuan Renminbi since 1949.
     The Ruble has been Russia's base currency since the early 1700s.
     So much for your LIE about each country's base currency coming
into existence after the 9/11 attacks.
     Since you've LIED about this, why should anyone believe any claim
you make about anything?

>And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look at 
>the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and 
>Nukes.

     Had nukes been used, there would be ample evidence. Your lies
will never alter the truth.

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

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

#519361 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! - (K is caught bulshitting again.)

alt.astronomy restored

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ee6puap7m5v0al3h9n8msh7mj569f39sp1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:35:42 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:ojpouatmgsr2h185it6mq4mlk8af2avoun@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:38:23 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
< snip >
>     China has used the Yuan Renminbi since 1949.
>     The Ruble has been Russia's base currency since the early 1700s.
>     So much for your LIE about each country's base currency coming
> into existence after the 9/11 attacks.
>     Since you've LIED about this, why should anyone believe any claim
> you make about anything?

Both Bast and I are talking about the currency used to buy and sell oil you 
dipshit.

>>And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look at
>>the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and
>>Nukes.
>
>     Had nukes been used, there would be ample evidence.

And who would tell us nukes were used?  Certainly not the media because they 
want us to think there were jets in Nuke York City when all there was were 
CGIs.

Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U

You are a complete asshole who still has no explanation for the lack of 
shadows from either Flight 11 or Flight 175.  Only the smoke clouds have 
shadows and not the bogus jets.  <G>

BTW to see the lack of a shadow from the bogus Flight 175 start the above 
video around 13:30.

Again, there is no way in hell that the following was from a jet fuel fire 
especially when you consider the fact the basements of the Twin Towers were 
not filled with debris.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Rocky 

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

#519372 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - Why does Roger keep using the same lies?

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 15:26:26 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>alt.astronomy restored
>

     Group list restored.
     Your OBSESSION with an unrelated group is not healthy, Roger.
Seek professional help for this.


>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:ee6puap7m5v0al3h9n8msh7mj569f39sp1@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:35:42 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:ojpouatmgsr2h185it6mq4mlk8af2avoun@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:38:23 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>< snip >
>>>Too bad that happened after the great 9/11 hoax where they used CGIs instead 
>>>of jets and nukes instead of jet fuel.  <G>
>>
>>     China has used the Yuan Renminbi since 1949.
>>     The Ruble has been Russia's base currency since the early 1700s.
>>     So much for your LIE about each country's base currency coming
>> into existence after the 9/11 attacks.
>>     Since you've LIED about this, why should anyone believe any claim
>> you make about anything?
>
>Both Bast and I are talking about the currency used to buy and sell oil you 
>dipshit.
>

     So the petrodollar has only been in use in China and Russia since
after 9/11/01? That's the claim you're going to make? Really?
     The petrodollar came into existence in 1973. This means your
claim of it appearing after 9/11 is proved to be the lie it is.
     Oil had been bought and sold in U.S. dollars since the end of
WW2, though the use of dollars that wouldn't be used in general
circulation (petrodollars) weren't used until the Nixon
administration. 
     Would you like to try a different lie? Maybe one where the truth
isn't so well known?
     And since you are COMPELLED to lie about things so easy to prove,
why should anyone accept any claim you make about anything?

>>>And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look at
>>>the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and
>>>Nukes.
>>
>>     Had nukes been used, there would be ample evidence.
>
>And who would tell us nukes were used?  Certainly not the media because they 
>want us to think there were jets in Nuke York City when all there was were 
>CGIs.
>

     As you've helped to PROVE, no CGIs were used.

>Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U
>
>You are a complete asshole who still has no explanation for the lack of 
>shadows from either Flight 11 or Flight 175.  Only the smoke clouds have 
>shadows and not the bogus jets.  <G>
>

     I've already proved that claim the lie it was and is. Please see
Message-ID: <kn6pua1ri42n82o9o5moj5aols2ftebgor@4ax.com> for the proof
that your claim is, being very kind, in error.

>BTW to see the lack of a shadow from the bogus Flight 175 start the above 
>video around 13:30.
>

     I see a shadow. I'm sure you do as well, but your mental
defect(s) will not allow you to admit the truth.

>Again, there is no way in hell that the following was from a jet fuel fire 

     Since no one has claimed jet fuel alone caused the towers to
collapse, a point raised by several people several times, your lie
continues to fail.

>especially when you consider the fact the basements of the Twin Towers were 
>not filled with debris.
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

     But they were. You may lie about this as often as your mental
defect(s) demand. It only serves to further prove you have very real
mental health issues.

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

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

#519427 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (test for K the kook)

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ufbpua5ch4vurfcdsvouoa72gg7q7sodbr@4ax.com...

Time out.

I need you to answer a quick question for me before I can argue any further 
with you.

Do you see any differences between the NIST cartoon and real life in the 
following video?

WTC 7 NIST Model vs. Reality
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY

TNX

BTW you have already proven you do know what a CGI does that real jets can 
not do and you can't tell the difference between a real EMP and an EMP from 
a small underground nuke so you are proving to be as big an idiot as jimp or 
the Ediot himself.

Rocky 

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

#519466 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (test for K the kook)

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

>Do you see any differences between the NIST cartoon and real life in the 
>following video?

>WTC 7 NIST Model vs. Reality
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY

Yeah, the videos of the building collapse always start _after_ the east
penthouse had already collapsed, but the NIST animation includes the east
penthouse collapse.  If the collapse videos started with the east penthouse
collapse, the NIST animation makes much more sense as it shows the columns
under the east penthouse collapsing first, taking the penthouse with it.

For those who haven't seen it, here's the collapse including the east
penthouse going first.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkOGkdNq13k

Kooksites _never_ show the east penthouse collapsing first as it would
disprove their claims.  The fact the east penthouse collapsed several
seconds before we saw the north and west curtain walls go proves that
a good-sized chunk of the building was ALREADY gone when we saw the
"start" of the collapse in the videos with the east penthouse collapse
censored out.

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

#519483 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice)

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:msis7v$utl$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>Do you see any differences between the NIST cartoon and real life in the
>>following video?
>
>>WTC 7 NIST Model vs. Reality
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY
>
> Yeah, the videos of the building collapse always start _after_ the east
> penthouse had already collapsed, but the NIST animation includes the east
> penthouse collapse.  If the collapse videos started with the east 
> penthouse
> collapse, the NIST animation makes much more sense as it shows the columns
> under the east penthouse collapsing first, taking the penthouse with it.
>
> For those who haven't seen it, here's the collapse including the east
> penthouse going first.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkOGkdNq13k
>
> Kooksites _never_ show the east penthouse collapsing first as it would
> disprove their claims.  The fact the east penthouse collapsed several
> seconds before we saw the north and west curtain walls go proves that
> a good-sized chunk of the building was ALREADY gone when we saw the
> "start" of the collapse in the videos with the east penthouse collapse
> censored out.

Either way NIST or you for that matter have yet to explain what and where 
something jumped across the street from WTC7 to damage Fiterman Hall.  <G>

And WTC7 clearly fell at 100% freefall for about 100 feet but NIST tried 
their hardest to hide that fact with averages where they started their timer 
as soon as one pixel made a change only a computer could catch well before 
there was any noticeable movement and then stopped their timing well after 
WTC7 had gone down past 100 feet.  See:

Physics - WTC7 Freefall by David Chandler - AE911Truth.org
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpAp8eCEqNA

Rocky 

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

#519670 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice)

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

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:msis7v$utl$1@pcls7.std.com...

>Either way NIST or you for that matter have yet to explain what and where 
>something jumped across the street from WTC7 to damage Fiterman Hall.  <G>

Look at the picture, k00ktard!
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/WTC_Area_With_Building_Numbers_50dpi.png
You can clearly see a chunk of WTC7 right next to the damaged part of 
Fiterman Hall.

>And WTC7 clearly fell at 100% freefall for about 100 feet but NIST tried 
<snip kookbabble>

We aren't talking about the rate of speed of the falling of the curtain
wall.  We're talking about how part of it fell across the street and 
damaged Fiterman Hall, as well as how kooktards hide the fact a good chunk
of WTC7 had already collapsed by the time the main collapse started, by 
not showing the penthouse vanishing several seconds earlier.

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

#519675 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (Michael fails the cartoon physics blind test twice)

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mslc31$jsi$2@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:msis7v$utl$1@pcls7.std.com...
>
>>Either way NIST or you for that matter have yet to explain what and where
>>something jumped across the street from WTC7 to damage Fiterman Hall.  <G>
>
> Look at the picture, k00ktard!
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/WTC_Area_With_Building_Numbers_50dpi.png
> You can clearly see a chunk of WTC7 right next to the damaged part of
> Fiterman Hall.
>
>>And WTC7 clearly fell at 100% freefall for about 100 feet but NIST tried
> <snip kookbabble>
>
> We aren't talking about the rate of speed of the falling of the curtain
> wall.  We're talking about how part of it fell across the street and
> damaged Fiterman Hall, as well as how kooktards hide the fact a good chunk
> of WTC7 had already collapsed by the time the main collapse started, by
> not showing the penthouse vanishing several seconds earlier.

Yeah, a certain wall but from the original videos it was a symmetrical 
collapse.  Those funky videos you came up with seem to be to cover for NIST 
screw ups because I've never seen them before and I've even downloaded 
videos straight from NIST.

Either way the trick NIST used to cover-up the fact that WTC7 came down at 
freefall was to start their timer before any obvious movement and then end 
it well past the 100 foot mark and then claim it didn't fall at freefall for 
that length of time.  NIST bullshits to the max and you would know that if 
you were one of the people that tried to help NIST with a life sized test of 
the Twin Towers.

What I think is funny now is nobody can build a building that collapses from 
the top down.  And we even paid NIST millions and millions and after their 
life sized test failed to go the way they wanted they stooped to using 
cartoons instead.  And not just cartoons but cartoons that were missing 
parts.

Rocky

BTW the playlist for the Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence is:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCuMULutHs&list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W

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

#519512 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - Why is Roger DESPERATE to divert attention from his own claims?

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 18:22:39 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:



Post edit restored to the original text you FEAR so much, Roger.



>>     Group list restored.
>>     Your OBSESSION with an unrelated group is not healthy, Roger.
>>Seek professional help for this.
>>
>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>>>news:ee6puap7m5v0al3h9n8msh7mj569f39sp1@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:35:42 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:ojpouatmgsr2h185it6mq4mlk8af2avoun@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:38:23 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>< snip >
>>>>>Too bad that happened after the great 9/11 hoax where they used CGIs instead 
>>>>>of jets and nukes instead of jet fuel.  <G>
>>>>
>>>>     China has used the Yuan Renminbi since 1949.
>>>>     The Ruble has been Russia's base currency since the early 1700s.
>>>>     So much for your LIE about each country's base currency coming
>>>> into existence after the 9/11 attacks.
>>>>     Since you've LIED about this, why should anyone believe any claim
>>>> you make about anything?
>>>
>>>Both Bast and I are talking about the currency used to buy and sell oil you 
>>>dipshit.
>>
>>     So the petrodollar has only been in use in China and Russia since
>>after 9/11/01? That's the claim you're going to make? Really?
>>     The petrodollar came into existence in 1973. This means your
>>claim of it appearing after 9/11 is proved to be the lie it is.
>>     Oil had been bought and sold in U.S. dollars since the end of
>>WW2, though the use of dollars that wouldn't be used in general
>>circulation (petrodollars) weren't used until the Nixon
>>administration. 
>>     Would you like to try a different lie? Maybe one where the truth
>>isn't so well known?
>>     And since you are COMPELLED to lie about things so easy to prove,
>>why should anyone accept any claim you make about anything?
>>
>>>>>And even if someone wants to cry out seismic activity they have to look at
>>>>>the preponderance of the evidence because most all of it says CGIs and
>>>>>Nukes.
>>>>
>>>>     Had nukes been used, there would be ample evidence.
>>>
>>>And who would tell us nukes were used?  Certainly not the media because they 
>>>want us to think there were jets in Nuke York City when all there was were 
>>>CGIs.
>>
>>     As you've helped to PROVE, no CGIs were used.
>>
>>>Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U
>>>
>>>You are a complete asshole who still has no explanation for the lack of 
>>>shadows from either Flight 11 or Flight 175.  Only the smoke clouds have 
>>>shadows and not the bogus jets.  <G>
>>
>>     I've already proved that claim the lie it was and is. Please see
>>Message-ID: <kn6pua1ri42n82o9o5moj5aols2ftebgor@4ax.com> for the proof
>>that your claim is, being very kind, in error.
>>
>>>BTW to see the lack of a shadow from the bogus Flight 175 start the above 
>>>video around 13:30.
>>
>>     I see a shadow. I'm sure you do as well, but your mental
>>defect(s) will not allow you to admit the truth.
>>
>>>Again, there is no way in hell that the following was from a jet fuel fire 
>>
>>     Since no one has claimed jet fuel alone caused the towers to
>>collapse, a point raised by several people several times, your lie
>>continues to fail.
>>
>>>especially when you consider the fact the basements of the Twin Towers were 
>>>not filled with debris.
>>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>>
>>     But they were. You may lie about this as often as your mental
>>defect(s) demand. It only serves to further prove you have very real
>>mental health issues.
>
>Time out.
>
>I need you to answer a quick question for me before I can argue any further 
>with you.

     You mean you are DESPERATE to divert attention from your delusion
that the petrodollar began to be used by China and Russia AFTER
9/11/01.  You also wish to divert attention away from the fact that I
have, once again, proved a claim of yours WRONG using the evidence you
provided. There is a shadow cast by the plane.
     It's a pity your post edit has been restored to the original text
you fear so much. I even left in alt.astronomy, though this won't be
good for your OBSESSION with the group, so that anyone there who is
reading can see how DESPERATE you are to distance yourself from your
own claims.

>
>Do you see any differences between the NIST cartoon and real life in the 
>following video?
>
>WTC 7 NIST Model vs. Reality
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY
>

     One is generate by computer, the other is real life. DUH.
     I also see that the real life video starts AFTER the penthouse
collapsed while the NIST video shows it. Do you have a plausible guess
as to why the person who made the video left out the bit with the
penthouse? I have a guess, but I want to know yours.

>TNX
>
>BTW you have already proven you do know what a CGI does 

     Yep. This is why I can state no CGIs were used for the 9/11
attacks. <G>
     I don't see how this connects to your claim that the petrodollar
came into use after 9/11/01 or your LIE about a lack of a shadow.

>that real jets can 
>not do and you can't tell the difference between a real EMP and an EMP from 
>a small underground nuke so you are proving to be as big an idiot as jimp or 
>the Ediot himself.

     You helped to PROVE no EMPS occurred on 9/11/01. The only way you
can now take the position that any did is if you claim you lied
previously. Is that the claim you're going to make?
     How does any of that connect to your delusional LIE that the
petrodollar only began to be used by China and Russia AFTER the 9/11
attacks? 
     How does your DESPERATE attempt to hide from the truth connect to
your claim that there was no shadow when you've known all along there
was one? 
     I honestly do not see the connection. You'll need to point it out
to me. <G>

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

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

#519358

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 11:38:23 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Tony Dragon wrote:
>>> On 05/09/2015 17:50, Rocky wrote:
>>>> "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:fnAVl.48267$d36.34889@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>>>> 9/11 building collapses - it WAS controlled demolition!
>>>>>
>>>>> The proof? - watch this video:
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO2yT0uBQbM&feature=player_embedded
>>>>
>>>> WTF?
>>>>
>>>> The first thing you have to do is realize the media wants you to
>>>> think the Twin Towers collapsed to the ground but there is another
>>>> story.
>>>
>>> Will this story be eligible for the Man Booker Prize?
>>>
>>>> The fact is the Twin Towers left very little on the ground
>>>
>>> Why did this nothing take so many dumptrucks to get rid of it then.
>>> You know about the dumptrucks, you posted a link about them.
>>>
>>>> and the twin towers left lot in the air
>>>
>>> So it's still there?
>>>
>>>> which are both tell tale signs of a nuclear
>>>> controlled demolition.
>>>
>>> Well as there was no ncd the above is incorrect.
>>>
>>>> And the lack of any radiation reading prove they were never
>>>> published.
>>>>
>>> But the link about radiation has been posted, and you have told us
>>> about Geiger counters going off.
>>> You really should remember what you yourself posted.
>>>
>>>
>>>> And even though the North Tower shook like a tuning fork for a few
>>>> seconds before it was vaporized the fact seismic data didn't show the
>>>> North Tower shaking proves the seismic records were as bogus as the
>>>> jets were.
>>>
>>> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
>>> the whole world about these nukes.
>>>
>>> Can you explain that?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US
>> dollar as their base currency.
>
>     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
> refereed to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.
>
>> Then a lot will be coming out, as they won't lose any money over the
>> theft and exposure of corruption the US now uses in it's day to day
>> business affairs.
>>
>> You don't get rich from sending someone to jail that owes you money.
>
>     Maybe so, maybe no.
>     If you can attach their assets you have a chance at it.




You can't sue a country after you crash their economy, and the world knows 
they don't have anything left.
Look at Greece, and Cypress
Russia and China aren't stupid.
They want to drain all the assets they can from the west,....before they 
lower the boom.

And the US sheeple just keep watching the talking heads on their TV's and 
the Kardashians telling them that all is well,....the economy is doing 
great.
9/11 was caused by some boogie-men, that live under your bed.
No money ? Out of a job for over a year ?  Just use your credit cards, and 
buy buy buy. 

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

#519376

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:15:30 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

[...]

>>>> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
>>>> the whole world about these nukes.
>>>>
>>>> Can you explain that?
>>>
>>> Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US
>>> dollar as their base currency.
>>
>>     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
>> refereed to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.
>>
>>> Then a lot will be coming out, as they won't lose any money over the
>>> theft and exposure of corruption the US now uses in it's day to day
>>> business affairs.
>>>
>>> You don't get rich from sending someone to jail that owes you money.
>>
>>     Maybe so, maybe no.
>>     If you can attach their assets you have a chance at it.
>
>
>You can't sue a country after you crash their economy, and the world knows 
>they don't have anything left.

     Where do I, or anyone else, mention filing suit against a
country? I mentioned attaching assets, which, to the rational mind, is
not the same as filing a suit. YMMV, of course.
     And note that your claim was in regards to someone. That would be
a person, not a country.
     I understand you're not very smart, and I've made allowances for
your very low intellect, but you can't be as stupid as you're
presenting. This is an act, right?

>Look at Greece, and Cypress
>Russia and China aren't stupid.

     And they don't use the U.S. dollar as their base currency. While
I did get the common name of China's currency wrong (it's the Yuan),
the rest is spot on.
     Don't get mad that reality and your claims are in direct
opposition. At this point in your life you should be quite used to it.

>They want to drain all the assets they can from the west,....before they 
>lower the boom.

     Will that be with a base currency they don't use?

>
>And the US sheeple just keep watching the talking heads on their TV's and 
>the Kardashians telling them that all is well,....the economy is doing 
>great.

     The economy certainly could be better than it is now, but it's
not as bad as it's been in the past.

>9/11 was caused by some boogie-men, that live under your bed.

     I ceased believing in the "under the bed monster" when I was
four. Don't you think it's time you ceased believing in them as well?

>No money ? Out of a job for over a year ?  Just use your credit cards, and 
>buy buy buy. 

     I have plenty of money. In June I purchased a new car for cash.
No lien. True, it's a Kia Soul, so it's not a particularly expensive
car, but I still have no payments.
     I've had the same career for nearly 20 years. As far as I am
aware, there are no plans to change that. But maybe you know something
I don't?
     I admit use my AmEx frequently. Mostly for the Delta Air Miles. I
pay it off in full every month. But then AmEx doesn't have revolving
credit, so I would have to regardless of anything else.
     Wait. AmEx may have one card with revolving credit. Suddenly I'm
thinking they do, though I'm too lazy to verify. It doesn't apply to
me, so I lack any motivation to look.
     What will you offer next to prove you have no connection to
reality? Time will tell.

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

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

#519435 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (K stop your bickering)

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:bjbpuah1bo3omq9kee3rt3e8abvd214qgf@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:15:30 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>

K stop your bickering because if the real terrorist behind 9/11 were 
international terrorist then nobody would want to go against them including 
the people in charge of the inconsistent seismograph readings.  OK?

What you really need to do is try and find out exactly what happens when a 
150kt nuke is detonated in sold rock and then ask yourself why that 
information is not easily accessible on the Internet.  <G>

I will state the following is a good read:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFZ8UcMgucY

Rocky 

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

#519437 — Re: Rocky's imaginary nukes

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> 
> What you really need to do is try and find out exactly what happens when a 
> 150kt nuke is detonated in sold rock and then ask yourself why that 
> information is not easily accessible on the Internet. 

What you really need to do is get help and find out why you are a
delusional idiot.

How do you explain the fact that seismographs all over the East Coast
recorded the tiny (about 2) signatures of the two towers collapsing
and the miniscule (about 1.5) signatures of the airplanes crashing in
the Pentagon and the woods, but no seismograph anyhwere on the planet
recorded the huge (about 6) signatures that EACH nuclear device would
have created?

Either every government, academic instutution, seismic research
organization, seismologist and amateur seismologist on the planet
is part of a world wide conspiracy or there were no nuclear bombs
involved on 9/11.

How do you explain the fact that there is video of New York when an
EMP would have killed all the cameras in the area and EACH nuclear
bomb would create it's own EMP?

Either everyone in New York had EMP hardened cameras or there was no
EMP because there was no nuclear bomb.




-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519514 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (K stop your bickering)

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 18:55:01 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:bjbpuah1bo3omq9kee3rt3e8abvd214qgf@4ax.com...
>>On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:15:30 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>>>>> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
>>>>>> the whole world about these nukes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you explain that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US
>>>>> dollar as their base currency.
>>>>
>>>>     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
>>>> refereed to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.
>>>>
>>>>> Then a lot will be coming out, as they won't lose any money over the
>>>>> theft and exposure of corruption the US now uses in it's day to day
>>>>> business affairs.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't get rich from sending someone to jail that owes you money.
>>>>
>>>>     Maybe so, maybe no.
>>>>     If you can attach their assets you have a chance at it.
>>>
>>>You can't sue a country after you crash their economy, and the world knows 
>>>they don't have anything left.
>>
>>     Where do I, or anyone else, mention filing suit against a
>>country? I mentioned attaching assets, which, to the rational mind, is
>>not the same as filing a suit. YMMV, of course.
>>     And note that your claim was in regards to someone. That would be
>>a person, not a country.
>>     I understand you're not very smart, and I've made allowances for
>>your very low intellect, but you can't be as stupid as you're
>>presenting. This is an act, right?
>>
>>>Look at Greece, and Cypress
>>>Russia and China aren't stupid.
>>
>>     And they don't use the U.S. dollar as their base currency. While
>>I did get the common name of China's currency wrong (it's the Yuan),
>>the rest is spot on.
>>     Don't get mad that reality and your claims are in direct
>>opposition. At this point in your life you should be quite used to it.
>>
>>>They want to drain all the assets they can from the west,....before they 
>>>lower the boom.
>>
>>     Will that be with a base currency they don't use?
>>
>>>And the US sheeple just keep watching the talking heads on their TV's and 
>>>the Kardashians telling them that all is well,....the economy is doing 
>>>great.
>>
>>     The economy certainly could be better than it is now, but it's
>>not as bad as it's been in the past.
>>
>>>9/11 was caused by some boogie-men, that live under your bed.
>>
>>     I ceased believing in the "under the bed monster" when I was
>>four. Don't you think it's time you ceased believing in them as well?
>>
>>>No money ? Out of a job for over a year ?  Just use your credit cards, and 
>>>buy buy buy. 
>>
>>     I have plenty of money. In June I purchased a new car for cash.
>>No lien. True, it's a Kia Soul, so it's not a particularly expensive
>>car, but I still have no payments.
>>     I've had the same career for nearly 20 years. As far as I am
>>aware, there are no plans to change that. But maybe you know something
>>I don't?
>>     I admit use my AmEx frequently. Mostly for the Delta Air Miles. I
>>pay it off in full every month. But then AmEx doesn't have revolving
>>credit, so I would have to regardless of anything else.
>>     Wait. AmEx may have one card with revolving credit. Suddenly I'm
>>thinking they do, though I'm too lazy to verify. It doesn't apply to
>>me, so I lack any motivation to look.
>>     What will you offer next to prove you have no connection to
>>reality? Time will tell.
>
>K stop your bickering because if the real terrorist behind 9/11 were 
>international terrorist then nobody would want to go against them including 
>the people in charge of the inconsistent seismograph readings.  OK?

     There were no inconsistent readings. But you are free to prove
your LIE to be the truth.
     I'm waiting...

>
>What you really need to do is try and find out exactly what happens when a 
>150kt nuke is detonated in sold rock and then ask yourself why that 
>information is not easily accessible on the Internet.  <G>
>

     Since there were no nukes, a TRUTH you've helped to prove, I
don't think I could ever find out.
     Given the TRUTH that no nukes were used, there can be no
information about them anywhere. This means it can't be accessed
anywhere.

>I will state the following is a good read:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFZ8UcMgucY
>

     Um, Youtube hosts videos, stupid. And you expect people to accept
your delusions about 9/11?
     As you already KNOW, the people in the video are not wearing
radiation protection. Nothing they are wearing will add any protection
from nuclear radiation.
     The smocks will reduce or eliminate the risk of their clothing
getting dirty. They will do nothing to prevent nuclear radiation from
entering the body.
     The respirators will reduce or eliminate the risk of inhaling
asbestos dust and anything else in the air that could cause harm. They
are not going to prevent nuclear radiation from entering the body. 
     The ear plugs will reduce the decibel levels reaching their inner
ears. And with the machinery that was around, this would be a good
thing. But they will offer nothing in the way of protection from
nuclear radiation.
     Of course, you already know this, but your mental defect(s) will
never allow you to admit it.

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

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

#519551 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (K poves she is a complete asshole)

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:p6squad2ehmmfjsnvu1u4dg28qqapsi808@4ax.com...

K you are a complete asshole and you proved it when you let other assholes 
on this ng tell you about the jury trial I won without looking at my 
exhibits for yourself.

The exact same thing holds true for all your bullshit about 9/11.  You let 
the media tell you want to believe without ever considering any of the 
evidence yourself.

And do not forget the main reason the videos do not record what happened 
right after the CGI rammed the South Tower is they didn't want people to see 
that the roadrunner holes were really created by thermite with white smoke 
and white smoke trailers.  More at:

Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U

And keep in mind that the above video is created by James Easton who is 
behind "9/11 the Biggest Lie" and might be the basis for the following too.

West Point professors plan to bomb newsrooms, colleges stems from 9/11 Big 
Lie
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/08/31/bradford/

Rocky 

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

#519561 — Re: stalker rocky babbles on

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
 
> K you are a complete asshole and you proved it when you let other assholes 
> on this ng tell you about the jury trial I won without looking at my 
> exhibits for yourself.

If you were not a bat shit crazy, lunatic, delusional stalker, your
ass would not have been hauled into court in the first place, kook.

Got a job yet, kook?


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#519647 — Re: 9/11 building collapses - PROOF of CONTROLLED DEMOLITION! (K poves she is a complete asshole)

On Mon, 7 Sep 2015 11:42:41 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:



I see you pulled a Rocky. When one pulls a Rocky, they have
dishonestly deleted part(s)s or all of a post they can't address in
the futile attempt to make the truth go away.

You'll note I include the post you FEAR so much at the end so that you
may address the TRUTH I presented.



>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:p6squad2ehmmfjsnvu1u4dg28qqapsi808@4ax.com...
>
>K you are a complete asshole and you proved it when you let other assholes 
>on this ng tell you about the jury trial I won without looking at my 
>exhibits for yourself.
>

     Your trial has no connection to 9/11/2001. None.

>The exact same thing holds true for all your bullshit about 9/11.  You let 
>the media tell you want to believe without ever considering any of the 
>evidence yourself.
>

     I've examined the evidence. 100% of it proves your claims of
nukes wrong. This includes evidence YOU provided.

>And do not forget the main reason the videos do not record what happened 
>right after the CGI rammed the South Tower is 

     There were no CGIs to record. This is why.

>they didn't want people to see 
>that the roadrunner holes were really created by thermite with white smoke 
>and white smoke trailers.  More at:

     No such holes were formed.

>
>Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U
>
>And keep in mind that the above video is created by James Easton who is 
>behind "9/11 the Biggest Lie" and might be the basis for the following too.
>
>West Point professors plan to bomb newsrooms, colleges stems from 9/11 Big 
>Lie
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/08/31/bradford/
>

     So he's made more than one video that is wrong. Is this supposed
to impress anyone?
     Now address the TRUTH I posted, unless your mental defect(s) make
it impossible for you.

[BEGIN C&P]

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:bjbpuah1bo3omq9kee3rt3e8abvd214qgf@4ax.com...
>>On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:15:30 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>>>>> What I can't understand is why the Russians, Chinese, Koreans etc tell
>>>>>> the whole world about these nukes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you explain that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait a few more months until China and Russia no longer use the US
>>>>> dollar as their base currency.
>>>>
>>>>     They don't do so now. China uses the Yuan Renminbi (often
>>>> refereed to simply as Renminbi. Russia uses the Ruble.
>>>>
>>>>> Then a lot will be coming out, as they won't lose any money over the
>>>>> theft and exposure of corruption the US now uses in it's day to day
>>>>> business affairs.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't get rich from sending someone to jail that owes you money.
>>>>
>>>>     Maybe so, maybe no.
>>>>     If you can attach their assets you have a chance at it.
>>>
>>>You can't sue a country after you crash their economy, and the world knows 
>>>they don't have anything left.
>>
>>     Where do I, or anyone else, mention filing suit against a
>>country? I mentioned attaching assets, which, to the rational mind, is
>>not the same as filing a suit. YMMV, of course.
>>     And note that your claim was in regards to someone. That would be
>>a person, not a country.
>>     I understand you're not very smart, and I've made allowances for
>>your very low intellect, but you can't be as stupid as you're
>>presenting. This is an act, right?
>>
>>>Look at Greece, and Cypress
>>>Russia and China aren't stupid.
>>
>>     And they don't use the U.S. dollar as their base currency. While
>>I did get the common name of China's currency wrong (it's the Yuan),
>>the rest is spot on.
>>     Don't get mad that reality and your claims are in direct
>>opposition. At this point in your life you should be quite used to it.
>>
>>>They want to drain all the assets they can from the west,....before they 
>>>lower the boom.
>>
>>     Will that be with a base currency they don't use?
>>
>>>And the US sheeple just keep watching the talking heads on their TV's and 
>>>the Kardashians telling them that all is well,....the economy is doing 
>>>great.
>>
>>     The economy certainly could be better than it is now, but it's
>>not as bad as it's been in the past.
>>
>>>9/11 was caused by some boogie-men, that live under your bed.
>>
>>     I ceased believing in the "under the bed monster" when I was
>>four. Don't you think it's time you ceased believing in them as well?
>>
>>>No money ? Out of a job for over a year ?  Just use your credit cards, and 
>>>buy buy buy. 
>>
>>     I have plenty of money. In June I purchased a new car for cash.
>>No lien. True, it's a Kia Soul, so it's not a particularly expensive
>>car, but I still have no payments.
>>     I've had the same career for nearly 20 years. As far as I am
>>aware, there are no plans to change that. But maybe you know something
>>I don't?
>>     I admit use my AmEx frequently. Mostly for the Delta Air Miles. I
>>pay it off in full every month. But then AmEx doesn't have revolving
>>credit, so I would have to regardless of anything else.
>>     Wait. AmEx may have one card with revolving credit. Suddenly I'm
>>thinking they do, though I'm too lazy to verify. It doesn't apply to
>>me, so I lack any motivation to look.
>>     What will you offer next to prove you have no connection to
>>reality? Time will tell.
>
>K stop your bickering because if the real terrorist behind 9/11 were 
>international terrorist then nobody would want to go against them including 
>the people in charge of the inconsistent seismograph readings.  OK?

     There were no inconsistent readings. But you are free to prove
your LIE to be the truth.
     I'm waiting...

>
>What you really need to do is try and find out exactly what happens when a 
>150kt nuke is detonated in sold rock and then ask yourself why that 
>information is not easily accessible on the Internet.  <G>
>

     Since there were no nukes, a TRUTH you've helped to prove, I
don't think I could ever find out.
     Given the TRUTH that no nukes were used, there can be no
information about them anywhere. This means it can't be accessed
anywhere.

>I will state the following is a good read:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFZ8UcMgucY
>

     Um, Youtube hosts videos, stupid. And you expect people to accept
your delusions about 9/11?
     As you already KNOW, the people in the video are not wearing
radiation protection. Nothing they are wearing will add any protection
from nuclear radiation.
     The smocks will reduce or eliminate the risk of their clothing
getting dirty. They will do nothing to prevent nuclear radiation from
entering the body.
     The respirators will reduce or eliminate the risk of inhaling
asbestos dust and anything else in the air that could cause harm. They
are not going to prevent nuclear radiation from entering the body. 
     The ear plugs will reduce the decibel levels reaching their inner
ears. And with the machinery that was around, this would be a good
thing. But they will offer nothing in the way of protection from
nuclear radiation.
     Of course, you already know this, but your mental defect(s) will
never allow you to admit it.

[END C&P]

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

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

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

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web