Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #517776 > unrolled thread
| Started by | gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-29 22:25 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-09-04 17:00 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 300 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Rocky, the lying Squirrel has been lying this same schick since at least Dec 2013 gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-29 22:25 -0500
Re: Rocky, the lying Squirrel has been lying this same schick since at least Dec 2013 noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 20:40 -0700
9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 00:17 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 23:09 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Pom Trotter" <none@nunmail.com> - 2015-08-30 11:02 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 22:39 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 04:43 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 09:21 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 08:47 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 10:23 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 15:34 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 18:13 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 04:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 07:16 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 16:27 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 16:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (Kent is given the no planes video) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 17:04 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (Kent is given the no planes video) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 04:01 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 19:37 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-31 08:35 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 07:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 16:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (kent tries to sidetrack) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 17:06 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (kent tries to sidetrack) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 03:59 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-31 22:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 20:01 -0700
job of de planes were/n't bombs noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 12:33 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 04:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-01 13:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 16:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 11:14 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 15:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 18:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 23:16 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 22:25 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-31 08:06 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 07:24 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 10:24 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 09:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-31 11:10 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 14:12 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 14:10 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-31 10:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 14:18 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-01 11:24 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 13:01 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-01 16:05 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 06:41 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-02 09:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 06:42 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Drew Smith" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-02 07:53 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 15:47 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-02 09:37 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-02 11:34 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-02 15:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-02 17:37 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 15:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 07:14 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 15:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-02 17:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 04:17 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 07:09 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-03 13:49 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-31 14:42 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 15:15 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-01 11:55 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-01 23:38 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-02 10:10 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-02 16:00 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 04:07 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-02 10:14 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 15:51 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 07:24 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-03 13:54 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 14:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 11:25 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 16:38 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 05:29 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 08:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 06:29 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 09:49 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 07:17 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 10:35 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 07:59 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 12:38 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 10:11 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Jack Smith" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-04 15:54 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-04 12:28 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 05:57 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-08 09:21 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 09:47 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 10:00 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:51 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-08 12:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 07:36 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 09:32 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-05 10:01 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rick Smith" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-03 16:53 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-03 19:11 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 07:10 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-04 10:15 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 10:38 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-04 12:35 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-04 16:15 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 07:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-07 11:03 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:36 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 16:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:36 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:34 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 04:07 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-04 10:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 05:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-07 11:08 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 10:24 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-01 12:06 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-01 23:52 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 04:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-03 21:47 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-03 07:52 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 04:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-04 22:12 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-04 15:21 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 09:51 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-04 17:55 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-05 09:15 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-05 07:36 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-06 04:59 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 07:40 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-06 08:41 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 22:48 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 05:30 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 08:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 10:12 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 07:11 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 09:21 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 08:42 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 10:51 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 10:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:48 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-08 11:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-08 11:12 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:48 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (HVAC missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:47 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 11:14 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (K missed the fact the OBL tapes were bogus) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 11:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Roger's mental defect(s) make honesty very difficult for him. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 14:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 15:26 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-09 07:27 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 11:49 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-09 13:37 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 06:00 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-07 18:24 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:13 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 10:47 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 20:24 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 05:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 05:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-06 08:50 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 06:01 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 12:11 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-04 11:16 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-05 09:17 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-05 09:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-06 08:58 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-05 23:05 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 08:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-07 18:27 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 05:41 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:14 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 10:18 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 09:43 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:33 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 12:05 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 22:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 22:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 13:45 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-08 12:40 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 05:57 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (K is full of it) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 07:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (Roger is once again reduced to lying, as I prove) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:32 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (FK is faced with more ?s) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 18:00 -0500
Re: Rocky still insane jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 23:27 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (Roger FEARS offering honest answers to questions) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:52 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (Kid is lying sack of shit) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 09:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (Kid is lying sack of shit) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-08 13:40 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (directed to Sar) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 13:47 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (directed to Sar) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-08 16:27 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (directed to Sar 2 ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 16:18 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (directed to Sar 2 ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-08 20:06 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (directed to Sar) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (Roger has to post edit to avoid the truth. Again) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-30 10:08 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 10:43 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 08:33 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 10:48 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 13:07 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 12:17 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 13:57 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 13:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-30 12:53 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 11:59 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 00:49 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 19:12 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 17:22 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 19:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 18:01 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 20:12 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 20:17 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-31 00:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 19:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-31 02:05 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (THE NO PLANES MOVIE) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 22:03 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (THE NO PLANES MOVIE) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-31 05:40 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 05:47 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. (USGS missed a big explosion) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-04 01:57 +0200
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-30 14:08 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-31 14:40 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 14:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-01 11:57 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-01 23:42 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-02 11:26 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-02 15:50 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-03 05:15 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-03 10:59 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-04 10:28 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 07:38 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 22:45 -0700
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-05 09:21 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 05:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-06 09:05 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 06:01 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-07 18:30 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:13 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 12:14 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 07:46 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-06 09:07 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 05:34 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-07 18:31 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 05:42 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 07:21 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 15:27 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 15:31 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 15:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 12:22 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 12:16 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. ?s for hvac "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 08:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. ?s for hvac HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 10:20 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. proof hvac is crazy "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 09:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. proof hvac is crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 16:41 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. proof jimp is a cartoon freak "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 12:56 -0500
Re: Rocky still batshit crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 18:11 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. proof jimp is a cartoon freak "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 13:32 -0500
Re: Rocky still a delusional stalker jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 18:35 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. ?s for hvac "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 11:14 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. K caught in a big lie "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 11:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Roger has to post edit to avoid the truth. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 14:57 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. ?s for hvac jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 16:40 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-05 10:03 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-06 09:24 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-05 23:09 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-07 18:34 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 07:24 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-08 12:24 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 22:45 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 22:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-07 10:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. BKD admits why he was so easily fooled "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 09:51 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 05:41 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 08:50 -0500
Re: Rocky still crazy as a loon jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-06 16:45 +0000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-09-07 18:35 +1000
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 05:50 -0400
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-08 09:20 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:51 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 03:59 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 07:26 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 06:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 was an inside job. Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-05 17:33 -0700
gilber34 shows us a very good link "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 11:25 -0500
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-30 23:58 +0200
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 20:59 -0500
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 05:26 +0200
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-31 06:49 +0200
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 16:37 +0200
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-31 20:41 +0200
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 14:32 -0500
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-01 06:36 +0200
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-01 15:41 -0500
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-02 23:51 +0200
Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-02 17:10 -0500
de planes were ****s noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 17:00 -0700
Page 15 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15]
| From | HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-07 05:50 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 was an inside job. |
| Message-ID | <msjmi1$jle$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #519503 |
On 9/7/2015 4:35 AM, Andrew W wrote: >> >> It didn't take long for Andy to show his true colors. He is an >> anti-American puke with an agenda. He doesn't give even a half a fuck >> about the truth. He wants to take every opportunity down run America >> down. >> > > Wrong, mate. Totally wrong. Your government is taking you for a ride. I am a willing passenger. Even tho the driver isn't the one I wanted, I still support him and hope he doesn't drive us all off a cliff (To expatiate upon your analogy). This is the beauty of democracy in America and our strength as well. When it comes to our governance, we all suppress our personal likes and dislikes and accede to the rule of law. >> Amazing that the country that gives him the right to act this idiotic >> way also is the one he despises. -- Woodland Critters Christmas https://goo.gl/DysCAl
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-08 09:20 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 was an inside job. |
| Message-ID | <msmqrk$atq$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #519508 |
On 9/7/2015 4:50 AM, HVAC wrote: > On 9/7/2015 4:35 AM, Andrew W wrote: >>> >>> It didn't take long for Andy to show his true colors. He is an >>> anti-American puke with an agenda. He doesn't give even a half a fuck >>> about the truth. He wants to take every opportunity down run America >>> down. >>> >> >> Wrong, mate. Totally wrong. Your government is taking you for a ride. > > > I am a willing passenger. Even tho the driver isn't the one I wanted, I > still support him and hope he doesn't drive us all off a cliff (To > expatiate upon your analogy). This is the beauty of democracy in America > and our strength as well. When it comes to our governance, we all > suppress our personal likes and dislikes and accede to the rule of law. > not so, democrapps pushed through obummercare without ANYBODY reading the entire thing, and NO Republicans voted for it. Democrapps did not ask the public to vote on it, as they know better. USA Government is crap right now, due to Obama and his leftists.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-09 03:51 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 was an inside job. |
| Message-ID | <mksvua1i7tovse82m5519q3bq4dite3p1m@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #519739 |
On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 09:20:31 -0500, gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com>
wrote:
>On 9/7/2015 4:50 AM, HVAC wrote:
>> On 9/7/2015 4:35 AM, Andrew W wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It didn't take long for Andy to show his true colors. He is an
>>>> anti-American puke with an agenda. He doesn't give even a half a fuck
>>>> about the truth. He wants to take every opportunity down run America
>>>> down.
>>>
>>> Wrong, mate. Totally wrong. Your government is taking you for a ride.
>>
>>
>> I am a willing passenger. Even tho the driver isn't the one I wanted, I
>> still support him and hope he doesn't drive us all off a cliff (To
>> expatiate upon your analogy). This is the beauty of democracy in America
>> and our strength as well. When it comes to our governance, we all
>> suppress our personal likes and dislikes and accede to the rule of law.
>
>not so,
>democrapps pushed through obummercare without ANYBODY reading the entire
>thing,
That's more the norm than the exception with all bills.
>and NO Republicans voted for it.
>
But there were enough votes to get it passed.
I'm not real happy with the ACA, but it's the law and until such
time as it is repealed, or ruled unconstitutional (I don't see that
happening), it will be the law.
>Democrapps did not ask the public to vote on it, as they know better.
>
When has congress, either party in either house, asked the
general public to vote on any bill?
We the people elect those who will represent us in the house and
senate. We also elect the person who will hold the top position in the
Executive branch.
We can lobby to get these people to vote a certain way on certain
bills, but beyond that, we have no real direct say in how they vote.
>USA Government is crap right now, due to Obama and his leftists.
The Republicans had a majority in both houses in 2011 and 2013.
What did they do with it?
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-09 03:59 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 was an inside job. |
| Message-ID | <f7tvuad225uuk6qrvetcl0qqj26ini3avb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #519928 |
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 03:51:11 -0500, "K Wills (Shill #3)"
<compuelf@gmail.com> wrote:
> We the people elect those who will represent us in the house and
>senate. We also elect the person who will hold the top position in the
>Executive branch.
Correction.
We elect those who elect the President. Of course, it's already
known in advance how each member of the electoral collage will vote,
which is why the ballot will list the Presidential candidate's name
rather than those of the electorates.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-07 07:26 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 was an inside job. |
| Message-ID | <gfOdnV0if8YsH3DInZ2dnUU7-S2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #519503 |
"Andrew W" <spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:msji5k$4et$1@dont-email.me... > >"HVAC" wrote in message news:msh1ko$nir$1@dont-email.me... >>On 9/5/2015 7:24 PM, Andrew W wrote: >>>> >>>> The truth was and has been out there from day one. It's not hidden or >>>> anything else. Swallowing troofery is a sign there's a problem, and you >>>> should get help. >>>> >>> >>> The truth from the U.S. government? That's not at all realistic if you >>> know how big corporate government works. >> >> >>It didn't take long for Andy to show his true colors. He is an >>anti-American puke with an agenda. He doesn't give even a half a fuck >>about the truth. He wants to take every opportunity down run America down. >> > > Wrong, mate. Totally wrong. Your government is taking you for a ride. And our banksters are taking everybody for a ride. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-06 06:02 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 was an inside job. |
| Message-ID | <497oualqs13svi4c5fdsg8lufvv0uka20j@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #519195 |
On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 09:24:49 +1000, "Andrew W"
<spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>"BDK" wrote in message
>>news:MPG.3054c02e2aa5219f98c26e@news.giganews.com...
>>
>>In article <msd8v5$sul$1@dont-email.me>, spam_ajwerner@optusnet.com.au
>>says...
>>>
>>> >"BDK" wrote in message
>>> >news:MPG.304cd8628733b53d98c256@news.giganews.com...
>>> >
>>> >In article <mru01d$oil$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
>>> >>
>>> >> gilber34 wrote:
>>> >> > Rocky, the lying Squirrel has been ko0k-ing this same old schick
>>> >> > since at least Dec 2013.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Nothing new, old fart re-farting same fart, over and over, stuck in
>>> >> > a DO loop.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/2014-01/0000.html
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > this index goes back to 2003 !
>>> >> >
>>> >> > http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> It just proves how 9/11 being an inside job,.....just won't go away.
>>> >> No matter how many people spend billions to keep trying to make it
>>> >> disappear
>>> >
>>> >It won't go away because Troofery is a terminal diesase with no known
>>> >cure.
>>>
>>> Ignorance is an even bigger disease. What's wrong with wanting to know
>>> the truth?
>>
>>The truth was and has been out there from day one. It's not hidden or
>>anything else. Swallowing troofery is a sign there's a problem, and you
>>should get help.
>
>The truth from the U.S. government? That's not at all realistic if you know
>how big corporate government works.
Oh goody! You're going to tell us how the multi-nationals control
everything, right? You will, of course, offer nothing valid as
evidence, but you *know* it's true.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 17:33 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 was an inside job. |
| Message-ID | <sv2dnQYMsulwFHbInZ2dnUVZ5sGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #517800 |
"Bast" wrote in message news:mru01d$oil$1@dont-email.me... << snip Bastian drivel >> *** So ... Bastie ... would you tell us again how your poor sister met her demise on 9/11 ... like which tower was she in at the time, which floor, what were the circumstances that placed her there at that most inopportune moment ??? Inquiring minds want to know ... if you can't muster enough lies, call Hillary for support ... she seems to be as big a bull- shitter as you are ... and I mean that in a nice way, Lazzbo ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 11:25 -0500 |
| Subject | gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <OKCdnW-ebJU7s37InZ2dnUU7-RmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #517776 |
"gilber34" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message news:mrtt4o$fku$1@speranza.aioe.org... > > Rocky > http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/2014-01/0000.html Thanks because the link used in that post was great. Here, I'll repost the link: ><http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_170.htm>< But now we can also add: Too bad the preponderance of the Evidence still says NUKES: See: 1. The toasted cars at Ground Zero are consistent with an above ground nuke but are also consistent with cars taken from a junk yard so in reality they were hauled there and used as props because certain people in our government had been informed nukes were used at Ground Zero. http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/moretoastedcars.html 2. At the time Ground Zero was called Ground Zero Ground Zero was defined as: "1. The point on the earth's surface directly above or below an exploding nuclear bomb." 3. When the North Tower shook so violently it was recorded on video it should have been recorded by the USGS also and that lack of data proves the USGS furnished us falsified information just like NIST, NNSA, NORAD, EPA and many other government agencies. 4. Not all EMPs are HORRENDOUS because lightening creates EMPs that do not destroy every digital device out there. And the EMP recorded by WCBS exactly when WTC1 shook so violently it was caught on camera was recorded by their AM receiver that was used to receive the video from their chopper and not recorded by the camera in their helicopter. DUH. 5. The most obvious evidence that the Twin Towers were nuked is the following photo that nobody to this day besides Dimitri Khalezov has even tried to explain. <G> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg 6. A mushroom cloud consistent with an underground nuke was recorded at Ground Zero. And can be found in the first link above. 7. All anybody has to do to see that there was lots of radiation at Ground Zero is to google "9/11 radiation" but their love of their Television Set prevents a lot of people from doing something so simple. Oh, and I'm sure I could add a lot more to the above list. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 23:58 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <d4hckfFnvjmU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #517892 |
Am 30.08.2015 18:25, schrieb Rocky:
> "gilber34"<invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:mrtt4o$fku$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>
>> Rocky
>> http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/2014-01/0000.html
>
> Thanks because the link used in that post was great. Here, I'll repost the
> link:
>> <http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_170.htm><
>
Quote from that page:
"
What kind of unconventional energy could have caused the Twin Towers to
turn to dust?
A fissionless fusion thermo nuclear event?
Direct Energy Weapons?
HAARP?
A scaled up weaponized version of The Hutchison Effect?
"
Actually I don't know, but something along this line sounds plausible.
I personally assume some kind of 'Hutchison effect' was utilised by a
DEW ('directed energy weapon') and HAARP would actually be one possibility.
Since I don't know that much about this effect, we should ask John
Hutchison himself.
It is also interesting to know, to whom Mr. Hutchison has told about
this effect:
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_6_1_7.html
" LETTER FROM JOHN HUTCHINSON: RESEARCH SUMMARY
By John Hutchinson"
Quote:
"10 years have passed since my very large scale demonstrations for the
USA Army Intelligence, Canadian National News, McDonnel Douglas,
Canadian Government, other news media and scientists - 750
demonstrations from 1970 to 1989. My efforts and lab were destroyed in
the later part of 1989 by Canadian officials who did not want the lab
going to Germany. "
TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 20:59 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <LOSdnUiDPoi_KH7InZ2dnUU7-YednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #517969 |
"Thomas Heger" <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message
news:d4hckfFnvjmU1@mid.individual.net...
> Am 30.08.2015 18:25, schrieb Rocky:
>> "gilber34"<invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>> news:mrtt4o$fku$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>
>>> Rocky
>>> http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/2014-01/0000.html
>>
>> Thanks because the link used in that post was great. Here, I'll repost
>> the
>> link:
>>> <http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_170.htm><
>>
>
>
> Quote from that page:
>
> "
> What kind of unconventional energy could have caused the Twin Towers to
> turn to dust?
>
> A fissionless fusion thermo nuclear event?
> Direct Energy Weapons?
> HAARP?
> A scaled up weaponized version of The Hutchison Effect?
> "
>
> Actually I don't know, but something along this line sounds plausible.
>
> I personally assume some kind of 'Hutchison effect' was utilised by a DEW
> ('directed energy weapon') and HAARP would actually be one possibility.
>
> Since I don't know that much about this effect, we should ask John
> Hutchison himself.
>
> It is also interesting to know, to whom Mr. Hutchison has told about this
> effect:
>
> http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_6_1_7.html
>
> " LETTER FROM JOHN HUTCHINSON: RESEARCH SUMMARY
>
> By John Hutchinson"
>
> Quote:
>
> "10 years have passed since my very large scale demonstrations for the USA
> Army Intelligence, Canadian National News, McDonnel Douglas, Canadian
> Government, other news media and scientists - 750 demonstrations from 1970
> to 1989. My efforts and lab were destroyed in the later part of 1989 by
> Canadian officials who did not want the lab going to Germany. "
>
>
> TH
Thanks for your input but I suspect the M291 resin they used on top of the
places they detonated the nukes helped to keep the radiation that they could
not lie about down.
And because the radiation was the worst in the first 3 days after 9/11 they
kept everybody out for the first 2 days and then only people that could
remain in machinery were allowed in on the third day.
And I also suspect that the concrete they used to bury the places where the
nukes were detonated under the Twin Towers will end up saturated in time and
Ground Zero will become radioactive again.
And it appears they are already having problems with the concrete
sarcophagus they used at Chernobyl because it is becoming radioactive.
Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 05:26 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <ce4f007df96b76fed1b7329b6460f7bc@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #518022 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the paranoid-delusional schizophrenic
woman-stalking failed truck driver), in
<news:LOSdnUiDPoi_KH7InZ2dnUU7-YednZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:
> "Thomas Heger" <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message
> news:d4hckfFnvjmU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Am 30.08.2015 18:25, schrieb Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind
>> the paranoid-delusional schizophrenic woman-stalking
>> failed truck driver):
>>> "gilber34"<invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>> news:mrtt4o$fku$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the paranoid-delusional
>>>> schizophrenic woman-stalking failed truck driver)
>>>> http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/2014-01/0000.html
>>> Thanks because the link used in that post was great. Here, I'll repost
>>> the link:
>>>> <http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_170.htm><
>> Quote from that page:
>>
>> What kind of unconventional energy could have caused the Twin Towers to
>> turn to dust?
>>
>> A fissionless fusion thermo nuclear event?
>> Direct Energy Weapons?
>> HAARP?
>> A scaled up weaponized version of The Hutchison Effect?
>>
>> Actually I don't know, but something along this line sounds plausible.
"plausible" LOL
To a broken-brained kook, pretty much everything sounds "plausible",
no matter how physically or logistically impossible it might be. LOL
>> I personally assume some kind of 'Hutchison effect' was utilised by a DEW
>> ('directed energy weapon') and HAARP would actually be one possibility.
Bwahahahaaaaa! Oh. My. God... are you seriously saying you believe the
Hutchinson Effect was used on the twin towers? The effect for which
John has to use several thousands of watts of radiative power at close
proximity just to get *small* objects to jiggle around and melt a bit?
It'd take more power than the entire US could produce to create enough
radiative power to do something like that to the twin towers, and it'd
likely kill every living thing within a few miles at the least. Like a
giant fucking gigawatt microwave oven turned loose upon a city. LOL
Knowing John, he'd likely tell you very quietly that you're completely
full of shit. LOL
>> Si<SMACKAKOOK!>
Fuck sake, wake up to reality for once, won't you?
> Thanks for your input but I suspect the M291 resin they used on top of the
> places they detonated the nukes helped to keep the radiation that they could
> not lie about down.
Bwahahahaaa! M291 resin kits are carried by US soldiers. It is a
universal dry chemical decontamination kit using a carbonaceous
polystyrene polymeric adsorbent material. It's for chemical nerve
agents and blister agents like GA, GB, GD, GF, GV, VE, VG, VM, VR, VX
and HD...
It is *not* for radioactive decontamination, you fucktarded schizo
kook. LOL
Do you bother to do *any* fucking research at all before your broken
brain gloms onto some utterly impossible bullshit, or is it that
you're simply too fucking stupid to understand that what your brain is
proposing would literally be quite impossible?
Moron. LOL
> A<SMACKAKOOK!>
Moron. LOL
> Rocky
Now, get to addressing the 20 ways your kook conspiracy theory
violates the laws of physics:
======================================================
1) Your estimation of the time between detonation and the time of
collapse puts the nukes between from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep below
the towers, a depth we don't even have the technology to drill to
today, let alone back in 1968. Not to mention the fact that at that
depth, the temperature is so high things like metal *melt*. That's
*why* we can't drill much deeper than the 7.636 miles of the Al
Shaheen oil well in Qatar (the deepest hole *ever* dug in human
history)... the equipment fails. That's why the Kola Superdeep
Borehole was abandoned at 7.619 miles deep.
2) The claimed "EMP pulse" in the WCBS video *you* provided wasn't an
EMP pulse at all, it was satellite uplink interference. If it'd been a
nuke EMP (especially one sized 150 kt), the nanosecond time frame of
the explosion (and thus the sharp peak of the EMP) would have caused
the camera's electronics to burn out. No amount of shielding would
have been sufficient to prevent that. That there is video of the
immediate aftermath proves there was no nuke, especially one sized
your claimed 150 kt, which would have destroyed all electronics for
dozens of miles radius.
3) The radiation experienced was of such short duration that there's
no way it was neutron or gamma bombardment from a nuke. If it had been
from a nuke the metal in the buildings would have shown high levels of
radioactivity for decades. It was found to be beta radiation from the
tritium in the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement weapon sights
that was the source. That you're gullible enough not to know that a
nuke would spread radiation far and wide is testament to how
delusional you are.
4) No nuclear detonation byproducts were found at the WTC complex or
anywhere in NYC (MID: <e62c14c89ab831a63f27243e265c711a@dizum.com>).
They found tritium from the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement
weapons sites, radium from industrial sources unrelated to nuclear
weapons and background levels for all other sources of radiation.
5) The seismic waves caused by a small 150 kt nuke wouldn't be
sufficient to drop the buildings, it'd barely even be felt by people
in the vicinity, especially with the bombs buried, as you k'lamed,
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep. It would take on the order of 2
MEGAtons to do so, especially at the depths you k'lame the bombs were
buried.
6) The trigger that sets off the nuclear explosion is a neutron
source. It naturally radioactively decays over time, and its decay
byproducts, the elements the neutron source transmutes into as it
decays, include xenon, which is a neutron absorber. It's called xenon
poisoning. Any bomb that has sat for 33 years without its trigger
being replenished will not have a trigger that is viable to start any
sort of nuclear chain reaction.
7) I've provided a video from *inside* one of the towers *as* *it*
*was* *collapsing*, showing the vibration from the buckling vertical
support column and *NO* EMP:
======================
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xYjoSvzWeo>
You'll note the massive shaking from the central support column
buckling, but *NO* EMP. And that was INSIDE the WTC tower. No amount
of shielding would have saved that camera from a nuke EMP.
======================
8) Why aren't you explaining how those supposed nukes were going to
survive at a depth of 37.28 miles (where the temperature would be
approximately 960 degrees F) to 96.93 miles (where the temperature
would be approximately 1840 degrees F), Ko0K?
9) Explain how a nuclear weapon can direct its explosion through a
hole without any of the compressive blast going out into surrounding
rock.
10) Explain how 19 nukes (according to you, another leap of logic
taken by your broken brain to explain away the 19 instances of
satellite uplink interference in the video *you* provided) were
detonated at the WTC complex in rapid succession, yet no ill effects
were experienced by electronics, the electrical grid or aircraft.
11) Why aren't you explaining how the personnel you claim were sent
down to service those nukes (because now that you know the
neutron-source triggers for nuclear weapons require replacement on a
periodic basis, your broken brain *had* to construct an entire
facility at 37.28 to 96.93 miles deep (far deeper than we have the
technology to dig even today, let alone back in 1968), complete with
"4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area
the nukes were maintained", or your brain would have been forced to
admit it was wrong when it told you those nukes sat untouched for 33
years and maintained their viability) are supposed to survive in 960
to 1840 degree heat?
12) You admitted (MID:<ed75e9d6f7ccf7296c075fd695673a37@dizum.com>)
that all the materials used in construction of the twin towers (all
1.5 million tons of it) had been accounted for and trucked off to the
Fresh Kills landfill. How will you reconcile your admission with your
kook blather that significant percentages of the buildings "vaporized"
(your word) and "floated toward Europe" (your words)?
13) Why can't you provide proof of the nuclear explosion seismic
signatures for these 19 nukes you k'lame were detonated at the WTC
site on 11 Sep 2001?
14) Where were the vertically-directed plumes of dust and debris
kicked up from your claimed nuclear weapons being detonated deep
underground, Ko0K?
15) Explain how the 19 nukes you claimed to have existed could have
tunneled holes from the underground installation 37.28 to 96.93 miles
deep that you claimed to have existed, to directly under the WTC
complex... in 12 seconds... through solid bedrock... prior to
detonating directly below the WTC towers (which, of course, fucks up
your timing between the detonations you claim took place (for which
you used the WCBS video, claiming the satellite uplink interference
was "EMP") and the collapses, leading you back to where your delusion
started. Congratulations, Dimwit, you've made the full circuit on The
Island of Insanity. Now go 'round again.).
16) Explain why you're now saying there were 34 nukes
(MID:<345fee8b286a91037bc806ed589d182d@dizum.com>), as opposed to your
previously k'lamed 19 nukes (and your previously, previously k'lamed 3
nukes)... would it be because your broken little brain is squirming
under the scorching twin beams of truth and reality, screaming in
agony at its being forced to see just how delusional it truly is?
While you're at it, get to explaining how the regular rad sweeps
(radiological surveys) at the twin towers (because the space was
primarily rented by government agencies) showed no nukes or any
contamination whatsoever, and how 34 nukes were obtained and put in
place without drawing any attention whatsoever. Of course, this
*still* fucks up your timing between the detonations (ie: your claimed
"EMP" on the WCBS video) and the collapses, leading you back to where
your delusion started... that unresolvable logic hole rears its ugly
head again. LOL
17) Your broken brain is yet again expanding your delusion with your
"34 or more nukes" blather (you're now saying there were 65 nukes
(MID: <984122ddbf1e4e5d6f5a7b3f56eeeb6f@dizum.com>))... eventually,
your broken brain will be telling you that NYC today is a CGI and the
real city was blown up by
1,592,629,490,173,371,449,138,916,004,581,949 intelligent nano-nukes
which autonomously dug their way up from their secret underground
MoleMan base 15,682,941 miles below the surface of our hollow planet
and attached themselves to every steel part of every building in NYC
and vaporized them and they all floated down to MoleVille, and the
fact that the EMP from all those nukes detonating at once didn't burn
out every electrical generating station, electrical substation, every
piece of electronic equipment, every vehicle, every aircraft... that's
*proof* that NYC is a CGI today! LOL
18) Explain how a nuclear weapon wouldn't have nuclear detonation
byproducts with the right nuclear trigger, according to your words
"with the right detonator you could have a 'clean' nuke" (MID:
<43acc7488b179f3bfea83ef7076f92b9@dizum.com>).
19) 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, Roger Wittekind.
20) Now you're saying the Ogallala Aquifer is radioactive (what's that
got to do with the WTC?)... with absolutely no proof... all you have
is the paranoid delusional rantings of other schizophrenics like you.
Do you see how utterly ridiculous you're beginning to sound? Get back
on your meds, you delusional loon.
======================================================
There are now 20 ways your kook konspiracy theory violates the laws of
physics... now you'd better get to work addressing each one, point by
point, or people are gonna know you're just a retard who can't grasp
simple physics.
Kook. LOL
--
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 buildings fell, 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 and collapse 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.
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 | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 06:49 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <d4i4nuFt41fU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #518045 |
Am 31.08.2015 05:26, schrieb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt.<snicker>
>
> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the paranoid-delusional schizophrenic
> woman-stalking failed truck driver), in
> <news:LOSdnUiDPoi_KH7InZ2dnUU7-YednZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly jump
> head first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message
>> news:d4hckfFnvjmU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>>> Am 30.08.2015 18:25, schrieb Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind
>>> the paranoid-delusional schizophrenic woman-stalking
>>> failed truck driver):
>
>>>> "gilber34"<invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:mrtt4o$fku$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>
>>>>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the paranoid-delusional
>>>>> schizophrenic woman-stalking failed truck driver)
>
>>>>> http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/2014-01/0000.html
>
>>>> Thanks because the link used in that post was great. Here, I'll repost
>>>> the link:
>>>>> <http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_170.htm><
>
>>> Quote from that page:
>>>
>>> What kind of unconventional energy could have caused the Twin Towers to
>>> turn to dust?
>>>
>>> A fissionless fusion thermo nuclear event?
>>> Direct Energy Weapons?
>>> HAARP?
>>> A scaled up weaponized version of The Hutchison Effect?
>>>
>>> Actually I don't know, but something along this line sounds plausible.
>
> "plausible" LOL
>
> To a broken-brained kook, pretty much everything sounds "plausible",
> no matter how physically or logistically impossible it might be. LOL
>
>>> I personally assume some kind of 'Hutchison effect' was utilised by a DEW
>>> ('directed energy weapon') and HAARP would actually be one possibility.
>
> Bwahahahaaaaa! Oh. My. God... are you seriously saying you believe the
> Hutchinson Effect was used on the twin towers? The effect for which
> John has to use several thousands of watts of radiative power at close
> proximity just to get *small* objects to jiggle around and melt a bit?
As far as I know John Hutchison supports Judy Wood. The idea of DEW
actually stems from Judy Wood. And if Hutchison is supporting her, he
most likely believes in her assumptions.
Since John Hutchison is THE authority about the 'Hutchison effect', I
would say, this explanation is actually plausible.
But you should forgive me, since I personally have no experience in this
kind of experiments and cannot tell, whether or not this idea is true.
But it sounds plausible and observations (at the WTC) and experiments
(by Hutchison) match.
This explanation is far better than Nano-thermite or mini-nuke.
The only problem is, that if such effects are possible, the destruction
could be caused by anybody in possession of such knowledge and such
devices. This ranges from KGB-spies to aliens.
So we had to rethink this '9/11 was an inside job'-theory, too.
TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 16:37 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <216117e07170ef27f719b137cb25b955@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #518062 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Thomas Heger, in <news:d4i4nuFt41fU1@mid.individual.net> did thusly
jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> Am 31.08.2015 05:26, schrieb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus:
>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt.<snicker>
>>
>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the paranoid-delusional schizophrenic
>> woman-stalking failed truck driver), in
>> <news:LOSdnUiDPoi_KH7InZ2dnUU7-YednZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly jump
>> head first into the wood chipper again:
>>> "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message
>>> news:d4hckfFnvjmU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>> Am 30.08.2015 18:25, schrieb Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind
>>>> the paranoid-delusional schizophrenic woman-stalking
>>>> failed truck driver):
>>>>> "gilber34"<invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:mrtt4o$fku$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>>>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the paranoid-delusional
>>>>>> schizophrenic woman-stalking failed truck driver)
>>>>>> http://alt.mailarchive.ca/astronomy/2014-01/0000.html
>>>>> Thanks because the link used in that post was great. Here, I'll repost
>>>>> the link:
>>>>>> <http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_170.htm><
>>>> Quote from that page:
>>>>
>>>> What kind of unconventional energy could have caused the Twin Towers to
>>>> turn to dust?
>>>>
>>>> A fissionless fusion thermo nuclear event?
>>>> Direct Energy Weapons?
>>>> HAARP?
>>>> A scaled up weaponized version of The Hutchison Effect?
>>>>
>>>> Actually I don't know, but something along this line sounds plausible.
>> "plausible" LOL
>>
>> To a broken-brained kook, pretty much everything sounds "plausible",
>> no matter how physically or logistically impossible it might be. LOL
>>>> I personally assume some kind of 'Hutchison effect' was utilised by a DEW
>>>> ('directed energy weapon') and HAARP would actually be one possibility.
>> Bwahahahaaaaa! Oh. My. God... are you seriously saying you believe the
>> Hutchinson Effect was used on the twin towers? The effect for which
>> John has to use several thousands of watts of radiative power at close
>> proximity just to get *small* objects to jiggle around and melt a bit?
> As far as I know John Hutchison supports Judy Wood. The idea of DEW
> actually stems from Judy Wood. And if Hutchison is supporting her, he
> most likely believes in her assumptions.
>
> Since John Hutchison is THE authority about the 'Hutchison effect'
He's not. See below.
> I would say, this explanation is actually plausible.
Except it's not. See below.
> But you should forgive me, since I personally have no experience in this
> kind of experiments and cannot tell, whether or not this idea is true.
> But it sounds plausible and observations (at the WTC) and experiments
> (by Hutchison) match.
>
> This explanation is far better than Nano-thermite or mini-nuke.
>
> The only problem is, that if such effects are possible, the destruction
> could be caused by anybody in possession of such knowledge and such
> devices. This ranges from KGB-spies to aliens.
>
> So we had to rethink this '9/11 was an inside job'-theory, too.
Given that Mel Winfield (an electrician and mining promoter) is the
originator of the theoretical concept that Hutchinson claims as his
"Hutchinson Effect", and given that the Winfield Effect has never been
replicated in a controlled laboratory environment using the same type
of equipment Hutchinson uses, and given that Hutchinson himself cannot
replicate the effects on demand, and given that Hutchinson has had his
credibility damaged by his admission to fakery of some of the effects
seen:
<https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070516124051AAQkrvQ>
"Hutchison later admitted to being "creative" with the footage, citing
pressure from the Discovery Channel to create material for the show
and an inability to legally reproduce the original effect, according
to Tim Ventura of American Antigravity.
In 2005, Hutchison admitted that he hadn't actually reproduced his
effect since approximately 1991."
And given that now John's gone a little off the rails... he's made a
few YouTube videos dressed in drag, calling himself "Baroness Karla
Kniption Rothschild:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtDkN0uqC8w>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ATnON7B7YY>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goMIqJ3pqOY>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1RDtQxte5A>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwQDRm6vJ7E>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXrzqQaT3Wo>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1A8-L8nAHc>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwzNjKPrcCs>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeDJUYE6JS8>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6W3CfZRdJk>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eKQQeCJxRg>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhZ7ZiRqYxw>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYjJ5T6XDu4>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLuzbNLnpnc>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMI3951rxjw>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqNFl1MPhFk>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo4yJAK6CnM>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_zgg4l1zpY>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMbxxCW7id4>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a6k7Jgrlb8>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hY6iVgG_y4>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfrsxuxYmf4>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe-Xsc-xvY8>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1fTFe0__2I>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TusL25MzyU>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9koSp8ZkN_c>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwGWI3lyNxg>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TobX9bXj0x8>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPEzTgyRWEA>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdK9_mC0m-M>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqNMD_Pz9kk>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ9OUWT_vjg>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8xR85SJmFA>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmrrLO7q7Lg>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZaAVPP9iRU>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyqRQObwFGU>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyqRQObwFGU>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91UFf4pW8No>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDTB49shw9E>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0flX2CPE5U>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX0kb7nbRhQ>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94_LSdm4s3c>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upiWyzfydzc>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgPdUhocME4>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgPdUhocME4>
Eh, there's plenty more there... but you get the idea.
And given that John Hutchinson now claims his "laboratory" was
"raided" by "government agents" and all his equipment "taken away"...
meaning he can't produce the effect anymore (and isn't that convenient
for him, eh?)...
And given that when Russ Gries (the veritable paragon of alternative
energy research veracity) went to visit Hutchinson, John Hutchinson
was unable to replicate his so-called "Hutchinson Effect"...
Well, let's just say that any claims by John Hutchinson should be
taken with a *mountain-sized* grain of salt.
Much as the libtard Klimate Katastrophe Kook "zOMG! Gluebool Woormang!
DUUURRRHHH!!" k'lames by one of our resident trannies should likewise
be taken with a similarly-sized grain of salt.
<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 buildings fell, 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 and collapse 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 "clean nuke"
that expulses no EMP and leaves no radiological contamination...
heaping proof upon proof that you're off your meds, Roger Wittekind.
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 | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 20:41 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <d4jlfpFasepU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #518137 |
Am 31.08.2015 16:37, schrieb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus: >>>>>> Thanks because the link used in that post was great. Here, I'll repost >>>>>> the link: >>>>>>> <http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_170.htm>< > >>>>> Quote from that page: >>>>> >>>>> What kind of unconventional energy could have caused the Twin Towers to >>>>> turn to dust? >>>>> >>>>> A fissionless fusion thermo nuclear event? >>>>> Direct Energy Weapons? >>>>> HAARP? >>>>> A scaled up weaponized version of The Hutchison Effect? >>>>> >>>>> Actually I don't know, but something along this line sounds plausible. ... >> As far as I know John Hutchison supports Judy Wood. The idea of DEW >> actually stems from Judy Wood. And if Hutchison is supporting her, he >> most likely believes in her assumptions. >> >> Since John Hutchison is THE authority about the 'Hutchison effect' > > He's not. See below. > >> I would say, this explanation is actually plausible. > This is a technical/scientific question. At first sight the idea (of Judy Wood actually) seems to be plausible. The term 'plausible' does not mean 'true', but 'worth to investigate further'. In comparison the 'mini-nuke-theory' presented by 'Rocky' is not plausible. > >> But you should forgive me, since I personally have no experience in this >> kind of experiments and cannot tell, whether or not this idea is true. >> But it sounds plausible and observations (at the WTC) and experiments >> (by Hutchison) match. >> >> This explanation is far better than Nano-thermite or mini-nuke. >> >> The only problem is, that if such effects are possible, the destruction >> could be caused by anybody in possession of such knowledge and such >> devices. This ranges from KGB-spies to aliens. >> >> So we had to rethink this '9/11 was an inside job'-theory, too. > > Given that Mel Winfield (an electrician and mining promoter) is the > originator of the theoretical concept that Hutchinson claims as his > "Hutchinson Effect", and given that the Winfield Effect has never been > replicated in a controlled laboratory environment using the same type > of equipment Hutchinson uses, and given that Hutchinson himself cannot > replicate the effects on demand, and given that Hutchinson has had his > credibility damaged by his admission to fakery of some of the effects > seen: This is about the person John Hutchison, who certainly is a little strange. This behaviour may be of interest, if you want to write a book about him, but not in connection to 9/11. > <https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070516124051AAQkrvQ> > "Hutchison later admitted to being "creative" with the footage, citing > pressure from the Discovery Channel to create material for the show > and an inability to legally reproduce the original effect, according > to Tim Ventura of American Antigravity. Well, maybe the effect is already known by others (what is quite likely, if the effect exists at all). But this is another irrelevant question. First question should be, if there have been ANY replications of this experiments (by whom ever). This would allow to decide, if such effect exists at all. > In 2005, Hutchison admitted that he hadn't actually reproduced his > effect since approximately 1991." > Also irrelevant, since he had held demonstration of his effect since 1970. This would make 21 years with successful presentations of this effect (if they were successful then). > And given that now John's gone a little off the rails... yeeesss, agreed: Certainly 'a little strange' this guy. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 14:32 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <x6idnW-93qePMXnInZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #518193 |
"Thomas Heger" <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message news:d4jlfpFasepU1@mid.individual.net... > > The term 'plausible' does not mean 'true', but 'worth to investigate > further'. In comparison the 'mini-nuke-theory' presented by 'Rocky' is not > plausible. Hey, the link gilber34 gave us earlier in this thread showed consistent mushroom clouds between GZ and an underground nuke and I even posted a photo an alleged "Ice Age Pothole" that is consistent with the hole a nuke under WTC4 would have left to do the damage it did to WTC2, WTC3 and WTC4. As for the radiation content of the air. I don't recall that ever being given to us so how can anybody say what the radiation level was or what is was not other than the people that showed up at Ground Zero in the first three days and were turned away until the radiation level came down. And I'll take a second look but I think I know where the video is that shows an alarm on a Geiger Counter going off at GZ. And look at what is at Ground Zero right now. There are two great big water fountains that appear to be dealing with leftover radiation that the nukes left behind. Either way, if all they did was bury the places where the nukes were detonated with concrete as proven by that photo of the alleged "Ice age pothole" then it will only be a matter of time before GZ becomes radioactive again. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-01 06:36 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <d4koadFiqkvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #518211 |
Am 31.08.2015 21:32, schrieb Rocky: > "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message > news:d4jlfpFasepU1@mid.individual.net... >> >> The term 'plausible' does not mean 'true', but 'worth to investigate >> further'. In comparison the 'mini-nuke-theory' presented by 'Rocky' is not >> plausible. > > Hey, the link gilber34 gave us earlier in this thread showed consistent > mushroom clouds between GZ and an underground nuke and I even posted a photo > an alleged "Ice Age Pothole" that is consistent with the hole a nuke under > WTC4 would have left to do the damage it did to WTC2, WTC3 and WTC4. > The basement of the WTC contained a huge garage. This space would have been the first a underground nuke would destroy. Only problem: this garage wasn't even scratched. It remained completely intact. We can see this on the several photos you have shown. They show all, that the streets themselves are not destroyed and had not been blown up (as underground explosions would suggest). This is clear evidence, that no underground nukes have been used. Other hints: the so call 'bath tub' remained intact. This was the dikes, that kept out the Hudson River from lower Manhattan and surrounded the WTC complex. Those walls still hold water, what would be a surprise, if a nuke went off below them. So: nukes = wrong theory ! But google for "9/11 Hutchison Effect Judy Wood" and there is a lot of stuff, that sounds plausible. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-01 15:41 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <R_CdnRpLH_wBkHvInZ2dnUU7-VmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #518340 |
"Thomas Heger" <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message news:d4koadFiqkvU1@mid.individual.net... > Am 31.08.2015 21:32, schrieb Rocky: >> "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message >> news:d4jlfpFasepU1@mid.individual.net... >>> >>> The term 'plausible' does not mean 'true', but 'worth to investigate >>> further'. In comparison the 'mini-nuke-theory' presented by 'Rocky' is >>> not >>> plausible. >> >> Hey, the link gilber34 gave us earlier in this thread showed consistent >> mushroom clouds between GZ and an underground nuke and I even posted a >> photo >> an alleged "Ice Age Pothole" that is consistent with the hole a nuke >> under >> WTC4 would have left to do the damage it did to WTC2, WTC3 and WTC4. >> > The basement of the WTC contained a huge garage. This space would have > been the first a underground nuke would destroy. Only problem: this garage > wasn't even scratched. It remained completely intact. No, that is not true because there was damage done to just certain areas of the basements and the area above the alleged "Ice Age Pothole" which was under the side of WTC4 closest to WTC2 was one of them. Don't forget the trick was to using deep underground nukes at the World Trade Center to set them off in rock so they would vaporize what was above them and not what was all around them. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > We can see this on the several photos you have shown. They show all, that > the streets themselves are not destroyed and had not been blown up (as > underground explosions would suggest). Yet at the same time the fact that there were walls from the Twin Towers that stood strong indicates that what destroyed the Twin Towers came from below and not above. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > This is clear evidence, that no underground nukes have been used. It appears you got your evidence from the media and not from the crime scene photos. > Other hints: the so call 'bath tub' remained intact. This was the dikes, > that kept out the Hudson River from lower Manhattan and surrounded the WTC > complex. Those walls still hold water, what would be a surprise, if a nuke > went off below them. If the entire area shook together the walls would be held in place right? > So: nukes = wrong theory ! Too bad the walls from the Twin Towers that stood strong still support the use of a nuclear controlled demolition. > But google for > > "9/11 Hutchison Effect Judy Wood" I've looked at that and again it does not explain what remained standing of the Twin Towers or why there was only damage to the two areas of the basements where the nukes were detonated which were the side of WTC4 closest to WTC2 and the side of WTC3 closest to WTC1. > TH Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 23:51 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <d4p9b2FnhgpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #518412 |
Am 01.09.2015 22:41, schrieb Rocky: > > "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message > news:d4koadFiqkvU1@mid.individual.net... >> Am 31.08.2015 21:32, schrieb Rocky: >>> "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message >>> news:d4jlfpFasepU1@mid.individual.net... >>>> >>>> The term 'plausible' does not mean 'true', but 'worth to investigate >>>> further'. In comparison the 'mini-nuke-theory' presented by 'Rocky' is >>>> not >>>> plausible. >>> >>> Hey, the link gilber34 gave us earlier in this thread showed consistent >>> mushroom clouds between GZ and an underground nuke and I even posted a >>> photo >>> an alleged "Ice Age Pothole" that is consistent with the hole a nuke >>> under >>> WTC4 would have left to do the damage it did to WTC2, WTC3 and WTC4. >>> >> The basement of the WTC contained a huge garage. This space would have >> been the first a underground nuke would destroy. Only problem: this garage >> wasn't even scratched. It remained completely intact. > > No, that is not true because there was damage done to just certain areas of > the basements and the area above the alleged "Ice Age Pothole" which was > under the side of WTC4 closest to WTC2 was one of them. As far as I know, the garage was empty, but almost undisturbed. It looked not at all like being subject to a nuclear detonation. The garage was actually one of these strange anomalies of 9/11, since it was even too little destroyed for a skyscraper falling on top of it (let alone a nuke). Unfortunately I cannot find pictures of it, but assume they are somewhere on Judy Wood's webside. > Don't forget the trick was to using deep underground nukes at the World > Trade Center to set them off in rock so they would vaporize what was above > them and not what was all around them. > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg To vaporize steel and concrete by a nuclear detonation would actually been possible, but would have looked VERY different. Such a detonation was neither seen or heard and it obviously did not happen. Seen was something different: 'dustification' at low temperatures. This is an EXTREMELY strange phenomenon and resembles 'Star Trek Technology'. Actually the closest thing to such an effect was the so called 'Philadelphia experiment', where allegedly a destroyer was teleported. Such a ship is much smaller than those skyscrapers, but actually also a large steel structure. And if it worked with a ship, the same trick could be done with those towers. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 17:10 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: gilber34 shows us a very good link |
| Message-ID | <vbidnU99XeeE6XrInZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #518616 |
"Thomas Heger" <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message news:d4p9b2FnhgpU1@mid.individual.net... > Am 01.09.2015 22:41, schrieb Rocky: >> >> "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message >> news:d4koadFiqkvU1@mid.individual.net... >>> Am 31.08.2015 21:32, schrieb Rocky: >>>> "Thomas Heger"<ttt_heg@web.de> wrote in message >>>> news:d4jlfpFasepU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>> >>>>> The term 'plausible' does not mean 'true', but 'worth to investigate >>>>> further'. In comparison the 'mini-nuke-theory' presented by 'Rocky' is >>>>> not >>>>> plausible. >>>> >>>> Hey, the link gilber34 gave us earlier in this thread showed consistent >>>> mushroom clouds between GZ and an underground nuke and I even posted a >>>> photo >>>> an alleged "Ice Age Pothole" that is consistent with the hole a nuke >>>> under >>>> WTC4 would have left to do the damage it did to WTC2, WTC3 and WTC4. >>>> >>> The basement of the WTC contained a huge garage. This space would have >>> been the first a underground nuke would destroy. Only problem: this >>> garage >>> wasn't even scratched. It remained completely intact. >> >> No, that is not true because there was damage done to just certain areas >> of >> the basements and the area above the alleged "Ice Age Pothole" which was >> under the side of WTC4 closest to WTC2 was one of them. > > > As far as I know, the garage was empty, but almost undisturbed. It looked > not at all like being subject to a nuclear detonation. > > The garage was actually one of these strange anomalies of 9/11, since it > was even too little destroyed for a skyscraper falling on top of it (let > alone a nuke). > > Unfortunately I cannot find pictures of it, but assume they are somewhere > on Judy Wood's webside. > > >> Don't forget the trick was to using deep underground nukes at the World >> Trade Center to set them off in rock so they would vaporize what was >> above >> them and not what was all around them. >> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > > To vaporize steel and concrete by a nuclear detonation would actually been > possible, but would have looked VERY different. True but Simon Shack does a very good job as proving every thing we saw about 9/11 on TV could have been faked even the alleged collapse videos. Me, none of the videos had a great angle for the base of WTC4 when WTC2 was nuked or for the base of WTC3 when WTC1 was nuked. And there are even videos of WTC7 that are clearly missing the spot in time where a a big flash that people saw would have been. If you haven't seen that video I can find it again since it is one of the videos that NIST has on their site. > Such a detonation was neither seen or heard and it obviously did not > happen. Not true. There is a video that shows the North Tower shaking like a tuning fork before the Nuke under WTC3 had a chance to work through all sorts of rock that should have been caught by seismograps but we were not allowed to see that data for some obvious reason. 9/11 WTC North Tower collapse by Etienne Sauret. Visible shaking 12 seconds before collapse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM88xJX5FsA > Seen was something different: 'dustification' at low temperatures. That is where Judy Wood messed up. She stayed away from how warm the air really was or what really caused so much of the debris from the Twin Towers to rise up into the sky. Her explanation was simply it had to be a certain size debris and she failed to point out is was ultra fine debris and the heat it used to go up was furnished by what was left of the nukes. > This is an EXTREMELY strange phenomenon and resembles 'Star Trek > Technology'. While I resped Judy Wood she just was not expecting an underground nuke and a lot of people were not. She spent too much time on the toasted cars that were just part of the setup like the light poles that were knocked over at the Pentagon. > Actually the closest thing to such an effect was the so called > 'Philadelphia experiment', where allegedly a destroyer was teleported. None of that was needed because I have no reason to doubt Dimitri. > Such a ship is much smaller than those skyscrapers, but actually also a > large steel structure. And if it worked with a ship, the same trick could > be done with those towers. But to me the only trick was with nukes and what people think they know about them was given to them by their Television Sets. <G> > TH Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 17:00 -0700 |
| Subject | de planes were ****s |
| Message-ID | <caa46eeb-ff10-413b-b1f6-45083bf8b171@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #517969 |
I don't have a problem with, the bombs were planes (or, the planes were bombs, reflexive property > the later part of 1989 by Canadian officials who did not want the lab > going to Germany. " > > > TH
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 15 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web