Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #520084 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-10 09:01 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-09-10 19:24 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 283 — 21 participants |
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.
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-10 09:01 +0200
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-10 15:44 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-10 19:07 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-11 15:17 -0500
Re: Rocky wrong again jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-11 20:38 +0000
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-11 18:54 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 00:14 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 09:11 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 08:48 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 10:33 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:02 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 21:46 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:12 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-14 19:24 +0100
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 13:36 -0500
Re: Rocky still crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 18:54 +0000
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-14 21:19 +0100
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 16:47 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:13 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 19:31 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-11 14:43 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-11 17:26 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 03:55 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:09 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-11 06:43 +0200
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-11 19:22 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-11 15:34 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-12 06:59 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:34 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-12 11:47 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-13 07:04 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 05:34 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-14 06:36 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 15:47 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-14 17:22 -0400
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 15:43 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 17:34 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-15 17:39 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 19:29 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 09:21 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 08:57 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 15:50 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 20:08 +0000
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 16:43 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 16:51 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 21:10 +0000
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:29 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 17:20 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:26 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 18:34 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 21:41 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:52 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:50 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 00:23 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:42 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 01:13 -0400
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:45 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 16:48 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 21:43 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:50 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 06:51 +0200
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:56 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 06:25 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:34 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 07:31 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:09 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 23:00 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:03 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 20:24 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:43 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:01 -0500
9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:29 +0200
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 15:25 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 14:13 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-16 13:25 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 17:56 +0000
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:19 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:34 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 17:00 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 17:09 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:40 -0700
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:24 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 10:12 -0400
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:35 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 09:47 -0400
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:44 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:20 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:36 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:11 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 05:09 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 10:47 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:20 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:43 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 21:15 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:12 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:09 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:13 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 22:25 +0000
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 15:48 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:02 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There are no brains in Rocky's head Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 15:29 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 18:49 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 00:02 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-21 02:27 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 03:04 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:18 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 21:41 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 00:57 -0400
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-23 15:17 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 15:59 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:49 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:48 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 15:56 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:18 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 15:21 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 17:05 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:22 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:40 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 13:06 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 16:59 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 21:48 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 16:03 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 07:58 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:30 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 17:58 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 05:23 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 13:38 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:36 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 14:05 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:48 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 06:48 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-24 09:41 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 13:08 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 17:13 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-24 21:52 -0400
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-25 15:46 -0500
planes thereupon none where noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 18:10 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-24 16:14 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:17 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 08:24 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:47 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:32 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 15:50 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:32 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:06 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:13 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:22 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:33 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:15 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 05:42 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 14:53 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 07:17 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:07 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 16:42 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 11:24 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:45 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:15 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 05:59 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:38 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 07:02 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:13 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 21:26 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:13 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 21:31 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:31 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:57 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-22 16:01 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-22 16:19 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:11 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:40 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:11 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:15 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 06:36 +0200
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 01:12 -0400
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 06:44 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:39 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:31 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:15 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 22:36 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:14 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 20:04 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:41 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:41 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:17 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 22:11 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:14 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 13:07 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-21 18:25 +0200
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-21 20:27 -0400
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-22 07:36 +0200
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-22 10:28 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2015-09-22 17:47 +0100
9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 2 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-23 05:27 +0200
9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1 Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-23 06:09 +0200
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1 "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-23 20:22 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-24 06:53 +0200
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-24 01:49 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1b Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-25 07:33 +0200
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes, Pt. 1a Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-24 06:59 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:27 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 17:38 -0400
no asbestos cladding on the main beams noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:38 -0700
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-18 05:59 +0200
if the planes were not bombs, or if they were bombs noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 11:21 -0700
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:42 -0500
Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:36 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:19 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-16 07:48 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-15 04:18 +0200
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 15:55 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-15 17:03 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:06 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:38 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:01 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:36 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:07 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:44 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:21 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 05:09 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-20 04:20 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:14 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-21 17:56 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-09-22 03:28 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:36 -0500
9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-16 07:37 +0200
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:42 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-16 17:46 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:06 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 00:30 -0400
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:38 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-16 17:59 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-17 07:11 +0200
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 00:05 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-14 17:06 +0200
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 15:57 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 16:31 -0500
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 16:06 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 12:09 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:47 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-11 17:20 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:36 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-12 08:02 -0400
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 05:42 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-13 04:18 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-13 04:45 -0700
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 16:04 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-14 16:03 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-14 14:19 -0700
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 16:17 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:06 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:54 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 16:01 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-16 21:08 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:02 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 02:12 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 13:33 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 13:45 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:45 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:06 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-18 17:46 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-19 06:25 +0200
Re: Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:22 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-16 11:32 -0500
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Stagger Lee <stag@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 12:40 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Stagger Lee <stag@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 15:28 -0400
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 14:10 -0700
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 16:56 -0500
Re: Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:19 -0700
Re: 9/11/01 - There were no planes "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 14:04 -0700
no bombs that were not planes e.g noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 19:24 -0700
Page 9 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 15 Next page →
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 16:07 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <jtqdnexTzL5u7J3LnZ2dnUU7-RGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522267 |
"dmaster" <dan.woj@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:d8eaa609-c293-4ca5-8c79-557e3f258d56@googlegroups.com... > On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 2:55:02 PM UTC-5, Rocky wrote: > ... >> NIST Video: Why the Building (WTC7) Fell >> National Institute of Standards and Technology >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK_iBYSqEsc >> >> Rocky > > Techniclaly, this is the "source". Of course it does require reading. > http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/wtc_finalreports.cfm > > Dan (Woj...) ============================ Don't forget about the Progressive Collapse Challenge where everybody is given the opportunity to build a building out of anything they want to build it out of but it has to collapse from the top down. <G> http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html And the funny thing is we all know NIST could win that hands down because all they would to do build a building just like they built their WTC7 out of cartoons. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 16:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3MWdnbUc3PZr5J3LnZ2dnUU7-L2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522267 |
"dmaster" <dan.woj@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:d8eaa609-c293-4ca5-8c79-557e3f258d56@googlegroups.com... > On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 2:55:02 PM UTC-5, Rocky wrote: > ... >> NIST Video: Why the Building (WTC7) Fell >> National Institute of Standards and Technology >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK_iBYSqEsc >> >> Rocky > > Techniclaly, this is the "source". Of course it does require reading. > http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/wtc_finalreports.cfm > > Dan (Woj...) Do not forget Dan that in both of NIST reports the one for the Twin Towers and the one for WTC7 NIST admitted that all they had where hypotheses and they never tested them and they were never peer reviewed. Basically NIST fed everybody a bunch of bullshit that wanted to fall for the official hijacker bullshit. But in reality all it did was give those that didn't fall for the official hijacker bullshit more ammo to prove we were lied to. NIST's Evasion http://911review.com/coverup/nist.html 9/11 Exposed - 2nd Edition (2015) Full Documentary Film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXRDq9nKJ0U Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 11:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ALidndKsUtEaFmDInZ2dnUU7-eWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #521964 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:bs7qvapc1gpluqof8db2dece6ir3s9cg9t@4ax.com... > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:36:51 -0500, Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> > wrote: > >>On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:06:37 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)" >><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> Your TV is lying to you. >>> >>> No it's not. >>> >>>>At least look at another view. >>> >>> And laugh at the stupidity of it. >> >> That would mean that you looked at it. > > I have. And I laughed at the stupidity of it. > >>This one for instance: >> >>MUST SEE Professor Steven Jones on the Controlled Demolition Of WTC >>Demolition >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE >> > > Who in their right mind pays any attention to a k00k like Jones? > At the 1:22 mark he PROVES how unreliable his comments are. The > official story is not that fire alone brought down the twin towers. He > is questioning a claim that's never been made. ROTFLMAO because you quoted him wrong. And it isn't so much what brought the Twin Towers and WTC7 down it is what our government claims did not bring them down. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 11:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <654rvaljau71k1703evenpbp2c22hs2pi2@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522020 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:24:07 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bs7qvapc1gpluqof8db2dece6ir3s9cg9t@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:36:51 -0500, Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:06:37 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
>>><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Your TV is lying to you.
>>>>
>>>> No it's not.
>>>>
>>>>>At least look at another view.
>>>>
>>>> And laugh at the stupidity of it.
>>>
>>> That would mean that you looked at it.
>>
>> I have. And I laughed at the stupidity of it.
>>
>>>This one for instance:
>>>
>>>MUST SEE Professor Steven Jones on the Controlled Demolition Of WTC
>>>Demolition
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE
>>>
>>
>> Who in their right mind pays any attention to a k00k like Jones?
>> At the 1:22 mark he PROVES how unreliable his comments are. The
>> official story is not that fire alone brought down the twin towers. He
>> is questioning a claim that's never been made.
>
>ROTFLMAO because you quoted him wrong.
I don't quote him at all. I do point out his claim. Since anyone
with an interest can check the video, such people will find I have
accurately reported what he said.
What did you hope to gain with your lie? I would like to know.
Not that you'll offer an answer, of course.
>And it isn't so much what brought
>the Twin Towers and WTC7 down it is what our government claims did not bring
>them down. <G>
I know, right? I mean, to claim it *wasn't* a herd of wild
elephants! Sheesh!
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 16:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <46bmvatb8aiin9gsi7bd6d8nmsgpbaqr6c@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #521556 |
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:00:07 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote: >Are you fucking daft? Of course jet fuel was burning! Greg's right on >this. All that black smoke was produced by a major shitload of jet fuel >burning which, BTW, is basically a blend derived from kerosene, and >nearly the same as diesel fuel... which burns black in a non-compressive >open environment. What do you think that huge fireball was at the >moment of impact? Many bombs went off as the witnesses said. CIA insider tells 911 truth. Time to re-examine your World-view, America! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnbMjAN7Bws The sudden, complete, straight down at near free-fall speed collapse of steel framed WTC building 7, which was not touched by the planes, is the SMOKING GUN of the 9/11 conspiracy. The building's few small fires and superficial debris damage could not account for this collapse, which had all the earmarks of controlled demolition by explosives. Videos clearly show this. Such demolitions take many days or weeks to set up - not the few hours between the plane "attacks" and the collapse. The explosives therefore had to be put in place BEFOREHAND. This lends credibility to the use of previously placed explosives to bring down the towers as well, which like the badly damaged and fire-gutted Deutchbank building would probably have remained standing. Propaganda shills, disinformationists, and those in psychological denial still insist the collapse of WTC 7 could not be what it obviously was, and they employ often ludicrous rationalizations and fabrications, elaborate lies, and infantile ad-hominem attacks to defend their indefensible position. The REAL terrorists are desperate to cover up their mass-murderous crime of the century - the permitting if not perpetration of, and subsequent political and economic exploitation of the fully preventable 9/11 disaster. Could Bin Laden have somehow totally incapacitated NORAD - the world's most sophisticated aerospace defense system - on that horrible morning? I don't think so! There is evidence of an INSIDE JOB even more clear and indisputable than the explosive demolition collapse of building 7 and the standing down of NORAD. Many very small HUMAN BODY FRAGMENTS have been found on the roofs of nearby buildings. These were too far away to be from jumpers from the towers. If the towers simply collapsed from damage and fire alone, what blew these bodies to smithereens and sent the fragments flying for considerable distances? The plane impacts did not have the explosive brisance (shattering force) necessary to do this - only HIGH EXPLOSIVES can blow bodies to tiny bits and throw them such distances. So - who can credibly account for these body fragments, other than their being the result of high explosives being detonated in the towers? The following article proves, using the inviolate laws of physics, the falsity of the government's propaganda explanation for the World Trade Center building collapses: SIMPLE PHYSICS EXPOSES THE BIG 9/11 LIE - GOVERNMENT BUILDING COLLAPSE EXPLANATION FAILS REALITY CHECK On September 11, 2001, the world watched in horror as the World Trade Center (WTC) Twin Towers collapsed, killing thousands of innocent people. Videos of the collapses were replayed ad nauseam on TV for days. About 5 hours after the towers fell, WTC building 7 also collapsed suddenly, completely, and straight down at near free-fall speed. This steel-framed building was not touched by the planes that struck the towers, and had sustained relatively minor debris damage and small fires. Nearby buildings far more heavily damaged remained standing. In June 2005, in an apparent response to an article by Morgan Reynolds, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated, "The American people know what they saw with their own eyes on September11, 2001. To suggest any kind of government conspiracy in the events of that day goes beyond the pale." We will prove here, with scientific rigor, that it's the government's tale that's "beyond the pale!" Did most of the American people really understand the unprecedented phenomena they had witnessed? Could a lack of knowledge of physics, and the emotional shock of this mass-murderous "terrorist attack" have stymied objective thinking and led to the blind acceptance of authoritarian assertions? The government and the media TOLD US what we saw. The government told us that we had witnessed a "gravitational" collapse; what is now referred to as a "pancake collapse". According to the government claims, the plane crashes and subsequent kerosene (like lamp oil - jet fuel is NOT exotic) fires heated the UL-certified structural steel to the point where it was significantly weakened, which is very difficult to believe, never mind repeat in an experiment. Even with massive fires that incinerate everything else, the steel frames of such buildings generally remain standing. According to the "pancake theory", this purported (all physical evidence was quickly and illegally destroyed) weakening supposedly caused part of the tower to collapse downward onto the rest of the tower, which, we've been repeatedly told, somehow resulted in a chain reaction of the lower floors sequentially, one at a time, yielding to the weight falling from above. There are some problems with that theory - it does not fit the observed facts * It cannot account for the total failure of the immense vertical steel core columns - as if they were there one moment and gone the next. * The collapse times were near free-fall, far too rapid to be due to gravity alone. This "collapse" was not without far more physical resistance than from the air alone. It proceeded through all the lower stories of the tower. Those undamaged floors below the plane impact zone offered resistance thousands of times greater than that of air. Those lower stories, and the central steel core columns, had successfully supported the mass of the tower for 30 years despite hurricane-force winds and tremors. Air cannot do that. Can anyone possibly imagine undamaged lower floors getting out of the way of the upper floors as gracefully and relatively without friction as air would? Can anyone possibly imagine the lower stories slowing the fall of the upper floors less than would, say, a parachute? What is certain, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the towers could not have collapsed gravitationally, through their intact lower stories, as rapidly as was observed on 9/11. Not even close. This is shown to be physically impossible! So WHERE DID ALL THAT ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTIVE ENERGY COME FROM? Conclusions In order for the towers to have collapsed "gravitationally" in the observed duration, as we've been told over and over again, one or more of the following zany-sounding conditions must have been met * The undamaged structure below the impact zone offered zero resistance to the collapse. * The glass and concrete spontaneously disintegrated without any expenditure of energy. * The massive vertical steel core columns simply vanished, as if by magic. None of these laws-of-physics-violating, and thus impossible, conditions can be accounted for by the official government theory of 9/11, nor by any of the subsequent analyses and arguments designed to prop up this official myth of 9/11. The Bottom Line It is utterly impossible for a gravitational collapse to proceed so destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere near free-fall time. This fact debunks the preposterous contention that the WTC collapses can be blamed solely upon damage resulting from the plane impacts. The unnaturally short durations of the top-down collapses reveal that the towers did not disintegrate because they were coming down, but rather they came down because something else was causing them to disintegrate. So, to the extent that people accept the ridiculous "pancake collapse" story, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Gates' other premise, that people know what they saw, is also false. It is left to you to decide if his conclusion, which was based upon clearly incorrect presumptions, is also flawed. The collapse of WTC building 7, which was NOT hit by any plane, also collapsed within a second of free-fall time later that same day. http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060118104223192 No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns Understanding the full truth of 9/11 seems to require two separate awakenings. The first, awakening to the fraudulence of the "official 9/11 story," is a pretty simple brain function and only requires a little study, logic or curiosity. We can help a lot with that part here and it's a major purpose of this site. The second step, however, consciously confronting the implications of that knowledge--and what it says about our media, politics and economic system today--is by far the harder awakening and requires an enormous exercise of nerve and heart. (As the Chinese say, "You cannot wake up a man who is pretending to sleep.") In other words, this part of the journey depends more on character than on maps and evidence so we can't help you much here, except to point out inspiring heroes and heroines who have courageously faced that truth, spoken out, and survived... www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 05:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <7414f1b7494f5142745d7d3b983e3b35@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #521711 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Topaz, in <news:46bmvatb8aiin9gsi7bd6d8nmsgpbaqr6c@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:00:07 -0700, > Rick "Jism Junkie Gerbil Cannon" Sabien (aka > Chimpy the Coin-Slot Operated SuckMonkey, aka > "Checkmate, Destroyer of Wieners #1") > <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote: >> Are you fucking daft? Of course jet fuel was burning! Greg's right on >> this. All that black smoke was produced by a major shitload of jet fuel >> burning which, BTW, is basically a blend derived from kerosene, and >> nearly the same as diesel fuel... which burns black in a non-compressive >> open environment. What do you think that huge fireball was at the >> moment of impact? > Many bombs went off as the witnesses said. No, they didn't. You're just a broken-brained kook off your meds. LOL > CIA insider tells 911 tru<SMACKAKOOK!> Liar. That you continue your lies so you can feed your unwarranted hatred of Jews is noted. That you're too stupid and too fucking weak-willed to face reality is noted. Kook. LOL Moron. LOL Laughingstock. LOL BTW, your "CIA insider" Susan Lindauer is a delusional schizophrenic nutjob who believes she has psychic abilities and can utter prophecies. She had no connections whatsoever to the CIA... and her only actual connection to anyone who *did* have connections with the CIA was a physician with ties to the middle east. She was a conspiracy theory nutjob even back then, continually pursuing meetings with him to pump him for information. He broke off contact with Lindauer due to what he described as an increasingly "seditious bent" to her discussions. IOW, she went off the rails. She was arrested by the FBI for taking money from the Iraqi Intelligence Service, and indicted for acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government... IOW, a spy. She was later arrested at Carswell AFB for psychological evaluation, only released after she was deemed mentally unfit to stand trial. She then began k'laming she was a CIA asset... but in reality, she had just known someone years prior (who had cut off all contact with her) who was a CIA asset. She was later yet again found mentally unfit to stand trial and judged to be mentally insane. Psychotic. She was never a CIA agent, she was never a CIA asset. Believe the stupidity that tard spews at your own risk... you'd do well to research her claims completely, given that she's been caught in many, _many_ lies. Par for the course for a psychotic delusional kook... they all lie to sustain their delusions. <https://www.metabunk.org/susan-lindauer.t2494/> <https://web.archive.org/web/20130620221315/http://www.scribd.com/doc/46046645/US-v-Susan-Lindauer-NYSD-448-F-Supp-2d-558-2006> <https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/46046645-us-v-susan-lindauer-nysd-448-f-supp-2d-558-2006-pdf.1445/> "Although defendant denies she is mentally ill, she is plainly aware of what others think, and so, as Dr. Kleinman noted, she "is disposed to dissimulate, i.e., minimize the presence and extent of her psychiatric difficulties, especially to mental health professionals — whom she distrusts and generally dislikes." (Kleinman Report 12/13/05 at 8) She acknowledged to him that if she testifies at her trial she will have to avoid touching on such subjects as her psychic powers, but "also noted that when (metaphorically) attacked by others she has spontaneously uttered prophecies." (Id.at 46) But then, given that you're just as insane as Susan Lindauer, there's little surprise that you'd not only believe her wholly implausible kookbabble, but that you'd accept it wholesale as your own delusion. <snicker> -- Roger T.E. Wittekind PO Box 471 167 40th Avenue East Moline, IL 61244 309-755-6374 309-755-6394 Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East Moline, IL. Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic. For instance: ============================= A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video *you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed over the concrete and walked away for 33 years. B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today, let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years". C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon, which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words). D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs, so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC. E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding, in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of *solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time the building shook, which is pretty much where we started. So I've proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility... saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode, where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP") and the shaking of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID: <e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're off your meds, Roget Wittekind. I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator" that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind. J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a "nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to silence them. K) Your broken brain has now stated (MID: <YtWdnQvC1PTFNWjInZ2dnUU7-NmdnZ2d@giganews.com>) that "liquid freon in the air conditioners helped to turn the nuke into a themo [sic] nuclear bomb" (your words). Complete and utter nonsense from your thoroughly broken schizophrenic brain, Roger. IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even worked up a sweat yet. ============================= Kook. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-18 17:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <gg4pva90amn4149hrhsb1g7q64lj2l1tmi@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #521774 |
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 05:59:43 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
You worthless little turds are all the same. Imagining you proved
something in the past when no one even reads your posts. The only
thing you prove in the present is that you should do the world a favor
and flush yourself down a toilet.
By NOMOREWARFORISRAEL
FBI Agent's 9/11 Motive Testimony: Israel References Omitted from 9/11
Repo=
rt:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DRTiNAVq65Cg&list=3DPLfrlsC1yJ2dRalMQdwNfu=
3wsQYT5xmNQn
9/11 Motive & Media Betrayal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D95ncn5Q16N4&list=3DPL3C32560738EF3C30&fea=
ture=3Dplpp
Bin Laden's own words about 9/11 Motive (from UK Guardian newspaper):
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/oct/30/alqaida.september11
Five Dancing Israelis Arrested On 9/11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DtRfhUezbKLw
Five Israelis Were Seen Filming As Jet Liners Ploughed Into The Twin
Towers=
On September 11, 2001
Were they part of a massive spy ring which shadowed the 9/11 hijackers
and =
knew that al-Qaeda planned a devastating terrorist attack on the USA?:
http://rense.com/general44/those.htm
Just watched following excellent interview with Anthony Shaffer:
Ex-Army Operative tells Jesse Ventura: U.S. Govt. Knew of 9/11
Hijacker & C=
ould Have Prevented the Terrorist Attacks:
http://www.ora.tv/offthegrid/2015/9/9/ex-army-operative-tells-jesse-ventura=
-us-govt-knew-of-911-hijacker-could-have-prevented-the-terrorist-attacks-0_=
133etabaslp1
Petraeus & Central Command also warned of Israel threat to US troops:
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/mehdi-hasan/2010/07/general-petraeus-isra=
el-emails
Stephen Sniegoski wrote:
Though hyperbolic at times, as is Raimondo's trademark, his article
hits th=
e spot in his major point that the pro-Israel neocons "have lost the
tug-of=
-war with the pro-American faction of the foreign policy
establishment: tha=
t's the significance of the Iran deal, and its importance should not
be und=
erestimated. This is a tipping point, a real sea-change - but the
neocons n=
ever give up, and they never give an inch. We underestimate them at
our per=
il.
"It's now fourteen years after 9/11, and the War Party's momentum has
been =
slowed, albeit not entirely halted. But this is no time for
complacency. Wh=
at they are counting on is their staying power within the GOP, and
their ma=
ny connections in the Democratic party - including their influence
over Hil=
lary Clinton, whose recent speech on the Iran deal was framed in terms
of h=
er total allegiance to Israel."
The Long Road From 9/11The neocons have been pushed back - but not
defeated=
:
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2015/09/10/the-long-road-from-911/
Scroll to link at bottom of following URL for Founding Father George
Washin=
gton's 'Farewell Address' warning to avoid passionate attachments and
entan=
gling alliances for/with foreign countries like the US has for Israel:
=20
http://astandforjustice.org
THE HIGH COST OF SUBSERVIENCE TO ISRAEL (by Paul Findley):
http://america-hijacked.com/2011/05/30/the-high-cost-of-subservience-to-isr=
ael-by-paul-findley/
No mention of above in US media because of following:
Do Jews Dominate in American Media? And So What If We Do?:
http://america-hijacked.com/2013/04/26/do-jews-dominate-in-american-media-a=
nd-so-what-if-we-do/
america-hijacked.com/
www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org
http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 07:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <8d1015e999c93217044eaddac1ff6075@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #521899 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Topaz, in <news:gg4pva90amn4149hrhsb1g7q64lj2l1tmi@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 05:59:43 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote > Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> > Y<SMACKAKOOK!> Your continuing to spew your unwarranted hatred of Jews, utilizing the 9/11 events as your vehicle, is noted. Of course, you must realize that in order to sustain your antisemitism via this vehicle, you've had to throw in with broken-brained schizophrenic paranoid-delusional tards like Roger T.E. Wittekind. So the fact that you're lumped in with the other TrooferTards who can't face reality shouldn't surprise you. You've become one of them, after all. <snicker> -- Roger T.E. Wittekind PO Box 471 167 40th Avenue East Moline, IL 61244 309-755-6374 309-755-6394 Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East Moline, IL. Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic. For instance: ============================= A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video *you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed over the concrete and walked away for 33 years. B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today, let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years". C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon, which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words). D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs, so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC. E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding, in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of *solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time the building shook, which is pretty much where we started. So I've proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility... saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode, where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP") and the shaking of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID: <e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're off your meds, Roget Wittekind. I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator" that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind. J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a "nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to silence them. K) Your broken brain has now stated (MID: <YtWdnQvC1PTFNWjInZ2dnUU7-NmdnZ2d@giganews.com>) that "liquid freon in the air conditioners helped to turn the nuke into a themo [sic] nuclear bomb" (your words). Complete and utter nonsense from your thoroughly broken schizophrenic brain, Roger. IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even worked up a sweat yet. ============================= Kook. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 04:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <gm9qvadfum7kekekjsh2eerq9n71gcvg2a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #521946 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:02:56 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
You worthless little turds are all the same. Imagining you proved
something in the past when no one even reads your posts. The only
thing you prove in the present is that you should do the world a favor
and flush yourself down a toilet.
CIA insider tells 911 truth. Time to re-examine your World-view,
America!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnbMjAN7Bws
The sudden, complete, straight down at near free-fall speed collapse
of steel framed WTC building 7, which was not touched by the planes,
is the SMOKING GUN of the 9/11 conspiracy. The building's few small
fires and superficial debris damage could not account for this
collapse, which had all the earmarks of controlled demolition by
explosives. Videos clearly show this. Such demolitions take many days
or weeks to set up - not the few hours between the plane "attacks" and
the collapse. The explosives therefore had to be put in place
BEFOREHAND. This lends credibility to the use of previously placed
explosives to bring down the towers as well, which like the badly
damaged and fire-gutted Deutchbank building would probably have
remained standing.
Propaganda shills, disinformationists, and those in psychological
denial still insist the collapse of WTC 7 could not be what it
obviously was, and they employ often ludicrous rationalizations and
fabrications, elaborate lies, and infantile ad-hominem attacks to
defend their indefensible position. The REAL terrorists are desperate
to cover up their mass-murderous crime of the century - the permitting
if not perpetration of, and subsequent political and economic
exploitation of the fully preventable 9/11 disaster.
Could Bin Laden have somehow totally incapacitated NORAD - the world's
most sophisticated aerospace defense system - on that horrible
morning? I don't think so!
There is evidence of an INSIDE JOB even more clear and indisputable
than the explosive demolition collapse of building 7 and the standing
down of NORAD. Many very small HUMAN BODY FRAGMENTS have been found on
the roofs of nearby buildings. These were too far away to be from
jumpers from the towers. If the towers simply collapsed from damage
and fire alone, what blew these bodies to smithereens and sent the
fragments flying for considerable distances? The plane impacts did not
have the explosive brisance (shattering force) necessary to do this -
only HIGH EXPLOSIVES can blow bodies to tiny bits and throw them such
distances.
So - who can credibly account for these body fragments, other than
their being the result of high explosives being detonated in the
towers?
The following article proves, using the inviolate laws of physics, the
falsity of the government's propaganda explanation for the World Trade
Center building collapses:
SIMPLE PHYSICS EXPOSES THE BIG 9/11 LIE - GOVERNMENT BUILDING COLLAPSE
EXPLANATION FAILS REALITY CHECK
On September 11, 2001, the world watched in horror as the World Trade
Center (WTC) Twin Towers collapsed, killing thousands of innocent
people. Videos of the collapses were replayed ad nauseam on TV for
days. About 5 hours after the towers fell, WTC building 7 also
collapsed suddenly, completely, and straight down at near free-fall
speed. This steel-framed building was not touched by the planes that
struck the towers, and had sustained relatively minor debris damage
and small fires. Nearby buildings far more heavily damaged remained
standing.
In June 2005, in an apparent response to an article by Morgan
Reynolds, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates stated, "The American people know what they saw with their own
eyes on September11, 2001. To suggest any kind of government
conspiracy in the events of that day goes beyond the pale."
We will prove here, with scientific rigor, that it's the government's
tale that's "beyond the pale!"
Did most of the American people really understand the unprecedented
phenomena they had witnessed? Could a lack of knowledge of physics,
and the emotional shock of this mass-murderous "terrorist attack" have
stymied objective thinking and led to the blind acceptance of
authoritarian assertions?
The government and the media TOLD US what we saw. The government told
us that we had witnessed a "gravitational" collapse; what is now
referred to as a "pancake collapse". According to the government
claims, the plane crashes and subsequent kerosene (like lamp oil - jet
fuel is NOT exotic) fires heated the UL-certified structural steel to
the point where it was significantly weakened, which is very difficult
to believe, never mind repeat in an experiment. Even with massive
fires that incinerate everything else, the steel frames of such
buildings generally remain standing.
According to the "pancake theory", this purported (all physical
evidence was quickly and illegally destroyed) weakening supposedly
caused part of the tower to collapse downward onto the rest of the
tower, which, we've been repeatedly told, somehow resulted in a chain
reaction of the lower floors sequentially, one at a time, yielding to
the weight falling from above.
There are some problems with that theory - it does not fit the
observed facts
* It cannot account for the total failure of the immense vertical
steel core columns - as if they were there one moment and gone the
next.
* The collapse times were near free-fall, far too rapid to be due to
gravity
alone.
This "collapse" was not without far more physical resistance than from
the air alone. It proceeded through all the lower stories of the
tower. Those undamaged floors below the plane impact zone offered
resistance thousands of times greater than that of air. Those lower
stories, and the central steel core columns, had successfully
supported the mass of the tower for 30 years despite hurricane-force
winds and tremors. Air cannot do that.
Can anyone possibly imagine undamaged lower floors getting out of the
way of the upper floors as gracefully and relatively without friction
as air would? Can anyone possibly imagine the lower stories slowing
the fall of the upper floors less than would, say, a parachute?
What is certain, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the towers
could not have collapsed gravitationally, through their intact lower
stories, as rapidly as was observed on 9/11. Not even close. This is
shown to be physically impossible!
So WHERE DID ALL THAT ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTIVE ENERGY COME FROM?
Conclusions
In order for the towers to have collapsed "gravitationally" in the
observed duration, as we've been told over and over again, one or more
of the following zany-sounding conditions must have been met
* The undamaged structure below the impact zone offered zero
resistance to the collapse.
* The glass and concrete spontaneously disintegrated without any
expenditure of energy.
* The massive vertical steel core columns simply vanished, as if by
magic.
None of these laws-of-physics-violating, and thus impossible,
conditions can be accounted for by the official government theory of
9/11, nor by any of the subsequent analyses and arguments designed to
prop up this official myth of 9/11.
The Bottom Line
It is utterly impossible for a gravitational collapse to proceed so
destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere near
free-fall time. This fact debunks the preposterous contention that the
WTC collapses can be blamed solely upon damage resulting from the
plane impacts.
The unnaturally short durations of the top-down collapses reveal that
the towers did not disintegrate because they were coming down, but
rather they came down because something else was causing them to
disintegrate.
So, to the extent that people accept the ridiculous "pancake collapse"
story, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Gates'
other premise, that people know what they saw, is also false. It is
left to you to decide if his conclusion, which was based upon clearly
incorrect presumptions, is also flawed.
The collapse of WTC building 7, which was NOT hit by any plane, also
collapsed within a second of free-fall time later that same day.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060118104223192
No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever
collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel
columns
Understanding the full truth of 9/11 seems to require two separate
awakenings.
The first, awakening to the fraudulence of the "official 9/11 story,"
is a pretty simple brain function and only requires a little study,
logic or curiosity. We can help a lot with that part here and it's a
major purpose of this site.
The second step, however, consciously confronting the implications of
that knowledge--and what it says about our media, politics and
economic system today--is by far the harder awakening and requires an
enormous exercise of nerve and heart. (As the Chinese say, "You cannot
wake up a man who is pretending to sleep.") In other words, this part
of the journey depends more on character than on maps and evidence so
we can't help you much here, except to point out inspiring heroes and
heroines who have courageously faced that truth, spoken out, and
survived...
www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org
http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 21:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <c71b8a94f82a1ecd817dbdff68e0d35a@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #521975 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Topaz, in <news:gm9qvadfum7kekekjsh2eerq9n71gcvg2a@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:02:56 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote > Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> > You worth<SMACKAKOOK!> Oh, you are *so* butthurt by reality! LOL > CIA insider te<SMACKAKOOK!> Your continuing to spam that same retarded tripe won't help it become any more fact-based... it's the rantings of a schizophrenic paranoid delusional whacko who refuses to take her meds nor even to acknowledge that she's insane. Kook. LOL Moron. LOL Laughingstock. LOL BTW, your "CIA insider" Susan Lindauer is a delusional schizophrenic nutjob who believes she has psychic abilities and can utter prophecies. She had no connections whatsoever to the CIA... and her only actual connection to anyone who *did* have connections with the CIA was a physician with ties to the middle east. She was a conspiracy theory nutjob even back then, continually pursuing meetings with him to pump him for information. He broke off contact with Lindauer due to what he described as an increasingly "seditious bent" to her discussions. IOW, she went off the rails. She was arrested by the FBI for taking money from the Iraqi Intelligence Service, and indicted for acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government... IOW, a spy. She was later arrested at Carswell AFB for psychological evaluation, only released after she was deemed mentally unfit to stand trial. She then began k'laming she was a CIA asset... but in reality, she had just known someone years prior (who had cut off all contact with her) who was a CIA asset. She was later yet again found mentally unfit to stand trial and judged to be mentally insane. Psychotic. She was never a CIA agent, she was never a CIA asset. Believe the stupidity that tard spews at your own risk... you'd do well to research her claims completely, given that she's been caught in many, _many_ lies. Par for the course for a psychotic delusional kook... they all lie to sustain their delusions. <https://www.metabunk.org/susan-lindauer.t2494/> <https://web.archive.org/web/20130620221315/http://www.scribd.com/doc/46046645/US-v-Susan-Lindauer-NYSD-448-F-Supp-2d-558-2006> <https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/46046645-us-v-susan-lindauer-nysd-448-f-supp-2d-558-2006-pdf.1445/> "Although defendant denies she is mentally ill, she is plainly aware of what others think, and so, as Dr. Kleinman noted, she "is disposed to dissimulate, i.e., minimize the presence and extent of her psychiatric difficulties, especially to mental health professionals — whom she distrusts and generally dislikes." (Kleinman Report 12/13/05 at 8) She acknowledged to him that if she testifies at her trial she will have to avoid touching on such subjects as her psychic powers, but "also noted that when (metaphorically) attacked by others she has spontaneously uttered prophecies." (Id.at 46) But then, given that you're just as insane as Susan Lindauer, there's little surprise that you'd not only believe her wholly implausible kookbabble, but that you'd accept it wholesale as your own delusion. <snicker> -- Roger T.E. Wittekind PO Box 471 167 40th Avenue East Moline, IL 61244 309-755-6374 309-755-6394 Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East Moline, IL. Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic. For instance: ============================= A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video *you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed over the concrete and walked away for 33 years. B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today, let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years". C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon, which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words). D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs, so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC. E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding, in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of *solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time the building shook, which is pretty much where we started. So I've proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility... saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode, where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP") and the shaking of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID: <e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're off your meds, Roget Wittekind. I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator" that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind. J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a "nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to silence them. K) Your broken brain has now stated (MID: <YtWdnQvC1PTFNWjInZ2dnUU7-NmdnZ2d@giganews.com>) that "liquid freon in the air conditioners helped to turn the nuke into a themo [sic] nuclear bomb" (your words). Complete and utter nonsense from your thoroughly broken schizophrenic brain, Roger. IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even worked up a sweat yet. ============================= Kook. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 04:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <03usva9j22ltsbvvrco8l5sjolbq4o11ms@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522073 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 21:26:24 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
You worthless little turds are all the same. Imagining you proved
something in the past when no one even reads your posts. The only
thing you prove in the present is that you should do the world a favor
and flush yourself down a toilet.
"The dancing Jews were there, in New York on 11 September 2001. They
were there to see the 9/11 attacks; to watch the twin towers being
destroyed - all three of them. NB the government enquiry glossed over
the collapse of WTC7, the third skyscraper that was dropped.
Conspiracy? Believe it.
They were there to record it for posterity or was it for Mossad? How
did they know it was going to happen? They are not saying. Why did the
American government let them go? Treason is one distinct possibility.
Jews controlling the American government are a matter of fact not
fancy. The Israel Lobby is powerful. The Israel Lobby bribes, bullies,
controls and American interests be damned.
9-11 Attacks - Five Dancing Jews Arrested -
http://www.todayscatholicworld.com/mossad-agents-911.htm
According to ABCNEWS sources, Israeli and U.S. government officials
worked out a deal - and after 71 days, the five Israelis were taken
out of jail, put on a plane, and deported back home. While the former
detainees refused to answer ABCNEWS' questions about their detention
and what they were doing on Sept. 11, several of the detainees
discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after
their return home. Said one of the men, "Our purpose was to document
the event."
ABC News Asks If The Five Jews Were Spies -
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123885&page=1#.TuW7ynpD6So
Millions saw the horrific images of the World Trade Center attacks,
and those who saw them won't forget them. But a New Jersey homemaker
saw something that morning that prompted an investigation into five
young Israelis and their possible connection to Israeli intelligence.
9-11 Attacks - The Five Dancing Israelis Arrested on 9-11 -
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html
Another source. Worth a look?
Dancing Israelis Debunked -
http://www.911myths.com/html/dancing_israelis.html
Separately, officials said a group of about five men were now under
investigation in Union City, suspected of assisting the hijackers. In
addition, the officials said the men had apparently set up cameras
near the Hudson River and fixed them on the World Trade Center. They
photographed the attacks and were said to have congratulated each
other afterward, officials said.
This is a competent analysis of the evidence; one pushing the idea
that the Jews were not part of an enemy conspiracy. There is no
mention of their involvement with URBAN MOVING SYSTEMS, a firm run by
Jews that fled the country very rapidly when they were exposed as part
of the action.
sunray22b
www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org
http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 21:31 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <a2332d399c982cfa032b7deeb36e7004@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #522181 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Topaz, in <news:03usva9j22ltsbvvrco8l5sjolbq4o11ms@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 21:26:24 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote > Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> > You worthless little tu<SMACKAKOOK!> Awww, you're *so* butthurt by the reality I promulgate that you're spamming your retarded tripe again and again in hopes that someone, anyone will believe your stupidity. LOL Moron. LOL Kook. LOL Laughingstock. LOL > "The dancing Jews were there, in New York on 11 September 2001. They Three were Mossad agents who knew in advance of the attack... Israel is in the Middle East, after all, and has extensive spying operations in Arab countries. The fact that Israel knew about the attack doesn't mean they contributed to the attack. The most you've got is that Israel didn't warn the US about the attack beforehand... except Israel *did* try to warn the US... and the US *ignored* those warnings. In fact, *several* countries warned the US about the impending attacks... Afghanistan, Argentina, Britain, Cayman Islands, Egypt, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Morocco, and Russia. Israel was warned by Germany. Germany learned about the impending attack (including full details) via the Echelon spy satellite network which is partly based in Germany. <http://www.historycommons.org/essay.jsp?article=essaytheytriedtowarnus> In June 2001, German intelligence warned the US, Britain, and Israel that Middle Eastern terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft and use them as weapons to attack “American and Israeli symbols which stand out.” Within the American intelligence community, “the warnings were taken seriously and surveillance intensified” but “there was disagreement on how such terrorist attacks could be prevented.” This warning came from Echelon, a spy satellite network that is partly based in Germany. [Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 9/11/01, Washington Post, 9/14/01] Israel then tried to warn the CIA, to no avail. Their warnings were taken seriously but nothing was done because the CIA didn't know how to prevent such an attack. <http://www.historycommons.org/essay.jsp?article=essaytheytriedtowarnus> In October 2002, the story broke in Europe and Israel that on August 23, 2001, the Mossad had given the CIA a list of 19 terrorists living in the US. The Mossad had said that the terrorists appeared to be planning to carry out an attack in the near future. It is unknown if these are the same 19 names as the actual hijackers, or if the number is a coincidence. However, the four names on the list that are known are names of the 9/11 hijackers: Nawaf Alhazmi, Khalid Almihdhar, Marwan Alshehhi, and Mohamed Atta. [Die Zeit, 10/1/02, Der Spiegel, 10/1/02, BBC, 10/2/02, Ha’aretz, 10/3/02] These are also probably the four most important of the hijackers (and two of the pilots). From them, there were many connections to the others. The CIA had already been monitoring three of them overseas the year before, and two, Alhazmi and Almihdhar, were put on a watch list the same day the Mossad gave this warning. [AFP, 9/22/01, Berliner Zeitung, 9/24/01, Observer, 9/30/01, New York Times, 9/21/02] So yeah, Mossad was here in the US performing spying operations... but not to hurt the US, they were here to *help* the US. We are, after all, their greatest ally. Why do you think the Mossad agents were allowed to go back home to Israel with no charges brought against them, you fucking loon? Because the US realized they were here spying on the *real* terrorists, the radical Islamists who carried out the WTC attacks. And yet again, reality shits all over your delusion. LOL Kook. LOL -- Roger T.E. Wittekind PO Box 471 167 40th Avenue East Moline, IL 61244 309-755-6374 309-755-6394 Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East Moline, IL. Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic. For instance: ============================= A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video *you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed over the concrete and walked away for 33 years. B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today, let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years". C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon, which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words). D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs, so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC. E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding, in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of *solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time the building shook, which is pretty much where we started. So I've proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility... saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode, where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP") and the shaking of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID: <e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're off your meds, Roget Wittekind. I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator" that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind. J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a "nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to silence them. K) Your broken brain has now stated (MID: <YtWdnQvC1PTFNWjInZ2dnUU7-NmdnZ2d@giganews.com>) that "liquid freon in the air conditioners helped to turn the nuke into a themo [sic] nuclear bomb" (your words). Complete and utter nonsense from your thoroughly broken schizophrenic brain, Roger. IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even worked up a sweat yet. ============================= Kook. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 17:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <38110b5e2jpolovii2aa7rji26ut82296k@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522263 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 21:31:15 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
You worthless little turds are all the same. Imagining you proved
something in the past when no one even reads your posts. The only
thing you prove in the present is that you should do the world a favor
and flush yourself down a toilet.
www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org
http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 07:57 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <6e1631c531faf9de0b15224e1ed019ed@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #522580 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Topaz, in <news:38110b5e2jpolovii2aa7rji26ut82296k@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 21:31:15 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote > Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> > You worthless little tu<SMACKAKOOK!> You get any more butthurt and you're gonna have to start bandaging it, Kook. LOL Now, if you think you're so intelligent, why can't your brain reconcile itself to the fact that it's badly off track, following a bunch of schizo kooks and their insane and impossible conspiracy theories? If you were so intelligent, you'd be able to do the in-depth analysis that proves 9/11 was no conspiracy. <snicker> -- Roger T.E. Wittekind PO Box 471 167 40th Avenue East Moline, IL 61244 309-755-6374 309-755-6394 Roger Wittekind the woman-stalking failed truck driver from East Moline, IL. Roger Wittekind (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate (which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes larger and larger leaps of illogic. For instance: ============================= A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video *you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed over the concrete and walked away for 33 years. B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and the tower shaking being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today, let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years". C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon, which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words). D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs, so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC. E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding, in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of *solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time the building shook, which is pretty much where we started. So I've proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility... saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode, where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP") and the shaking of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL H) Now you're saying the OKC bombing was nuclear in nature (MID: <e3f0e4f638e69c3db43076c8b842db91@dizum.com>), and a new era of widespread nuclear terrorism has arrived... proof positive that you're off your meds, Roget Wittekind. I) To back up yor "nuclear terrorism era" k'lame in H) above, you're now further k'laming there is such a thing as a magical "detonator" that causes a nuclear weapon to be a "clean nuke" which expulses no EMP and leaves no radiological contamination... heaping proof upon proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind. J) To explain away the lack of any evidence of your k'lame of a "nuclear terrorism era", your broken brain has conceived that your magical nukes are employing "Hushaboom technology" (your words) to silence them. K) Your broken brain has now stated (MID: <YtWdnQvC1PTFNWjInZ2dnUU7-NmdnZ2d@giganews.com>) that "liquid freon in the air conditioners helped to turn the nuke into a themo [sic] nuclear bomb" (your words). Complete and utter nonsense from your thoroughly broken schizophrenic brain, Roger. IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even worked up a sweat yet. ============================= Kook. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 16:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ucg30b1vpjfsveg4jd2ng270jabpojiroe@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522648 |
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 07:57:50 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
You worthless little turds are all the same. Imagining you proved
something in the past when no one even reads your posts. The only
thing you prove in the present is that you should do the world a favor
and flush yourself down a toilet.
www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org
http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 16:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <v_adnR2kovS_W5zLnZ2dnUU7-YvOydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522722 |
"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ucg30b1vpjfsveg4jd2ng270jabpojiroe@4ax.com... > On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 07:57:50 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote > Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: > >>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> >> > > You worthless little turds are all the same. Imagining you proved > something in the past when no one even reads your posts. The only > thing you prove in the present is that you should do the world a favor > and flush yourself down a toilet. A lot of people know that the Friendly Neighborhood Fiend is a worthless liar and nobody will hold it against you if you just ignore him. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 05:11 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kh1tva9465g245gr56483qb1k3h6ra7lm4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #521975 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 04:13:08 -0500, Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:02:56 +0200 (CEST), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
>Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>
> You worthless little turds are all the same. Imagining you proved
>something in the past when no one even reads your posts. The only
>thing you prove in the present is that you should do the world a favor
>and flush yourself down a toilet.
>
>
>CIA insider tells 911 truth. Time to re-examine your World-view,
>America!
There are many words that can be used to describe Susan Lindauer.
CIA insider are NOT among them.
She has never worked for the CIA. She was never a CIA asset. She
knew someone who was, at one time, an asset. But the friendship she
had with a doctor with some ties to the CIA.
Said doctor cut off all interaction with Lindauer because of her
obvious mental illness.
Of course, you already know this. FNVW already posted about it,
including links to support his claims.
[...]
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 17:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <hb110bllfqn3vkub1mum22k2kjkrpat2nj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522192 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 05:11:37 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote: > > There are many words that can be used to describe Susan Lindauer. >CIA insider are NOT among them. > She has never worked for the CIA. She was never a CIA asset. She >knew someone who was, at one time, an asset. But the friendship she >had with a doctor with some ties to the CIA. > Said doctor cut off all interaction with Lindauer because of her >obvious mental illness. > Of course, you already know this. FNVW already posted about it, >including links to support his claims. > I neither believe it nor heard it before. I don't read anything from FNVW because he is a piece of shit. And calling opponants of the government mentally ill was a common Soviet tactic. Those who go against the powers be often run into these government Shills, (Shill #3). www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <id720b52o659n29md4q18d28t86ltckh84@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522581 |
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:40:49 -0500, Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 05:11:37 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
><compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> There are many words that can be used to describe Susan Lindauer.
>>CIA insider are NOT among them.
>> She has never worked for the CIA. She was never a CIA asset. She
>>knew someone who was, at one time, an asset. But the friendship she
>>had with a doctor with some ties to the CIA.
>> Said doctor cut off all interaction with Lindauer because of her
>>obvious mental illness.
>> Of course, you already know this. FNVW already posted about it,
>>including links to support his claims.
>>
> I neither believe it nor heard it before. I don't read anything from
>FNVW because he is a piece of shit.
And yet, you reply to nearly every one of his posts.
Odd that.
>And calling opponants of the
>government mentally ill was a common Soviet tactic.
Your evidence that the doctor in question was a part of the
Soviet Union is..?
>Those who go
>against the powers be often run into these government Shills,
> (Shill #3).
You do realize that the Shill title is a joke, right? If someone
is a shill, they will not admit it. That I, and others, claim the
title should be absolute proof that we are not actually shills.
Sadly, it does require a small degree of intellect to understand
this, so it is very possible you are unable to do so.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 16:11 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sfamva92ergt4lc9827bt1685i1v8030co@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #521525 |
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:34:42 -0400, "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote: >Oh please. So you torched a couple pint of JetA. Big fucking deal. >Did you ever try torching 40,000 some odd gallons in a confined >space that was like a giant chimney? No? I didn't think so. > >In effect you lit a match and now you think you're an expert on >forest fires. How droll! > >40,000 some odd gallons of jet fuel was burning in those buildings. >You don't think almost a full load of fuel just suddenly vanished, >do you? It would be gone pretty fast as the expert said. >Sorry, but it doesn't burn all at one time. It doesn't burn at ALL >unless there is oxygen present to allow it to burn. >LOL! So all that black smoke and melted steel came from carpets, paper >and furniture burning? Yah, right! From the thermite bombs that the inside job people used, as this video proves: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE >Oh please, again. You can't extrapolate between what happens when >your torch 12 ounces of fuel compared to when you torch 40,000 >gallons of fuel. > >Get a freaking clue already. Oh please, your TV and government orders you to believe them and you do. You could spin out such BS on any subject you want and you know it. Get a freaking clue already. Why don't find someone govenment official so you can kiss his boots. www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web