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


Groups > sci.physics > #519432 > unrolled thread

WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality

Started by"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
First post2015-09-06 18:38 -0500
Last post2015-09-07 17:43 -0500
Articles 20 on this page of 28 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality  "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 18:38 -0500
    Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 00:38 +0000
    Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-07 02:28 +0000
      Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 22:25 -0500
        Re: Rocky lies some more jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 05:57 +0000
        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 00:48 +0000
          Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 20:15 -0500
            Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 02:42 +0000
              Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 22:23 -0500
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 16:46 +0000
                  Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 12:24 -0500
                    Re: Rocky still deluded jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-08 18:08 +0000
                    Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-09 06:41 +0200
                    Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-09 17:32 +0000
                      Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-09 17:20 -0500
                        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-10 03:07 +0000
                  Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael runs from the same issue NIST ran from) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 12:39 -0500
              Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-08 06:41 +0200
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-09 06:11 +0200
          Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:57 -0500
    Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:11 -0500
      Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (K proves he can not recognize where debris came from) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 08:52 -0500
        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (K proves he can not recognize where debris came from) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-07 18:11 +0000
          Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael fails to address certain issues) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 15:20 -0500
            Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael fails to address certain issues) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 01:06 +0000
              Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael fails to address certain issues again) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 20:46 -0500
          Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (2 Michael a better desc) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 16:59 -0500
        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (K proves he can not recognize where debris came from) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:43 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →


#519432 — WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-09-06 18:38 -0500
SubjectWTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality
Message-ID<NaidneSC87I7U3HInZ2dnUU7-aednZ2d@giganews.com>
I've used the video in this post before to see if someone was Cartoon 
Physics blind or not.

A person that is blind to Cartoon Physics will not see any differences 
between the NIST Cartoon of WTC7 and real life.  <G>

Go ahead and take the test if you dare.

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

First, I'll tell  you what you did not see and that is how WTC7 destroyed 
Fiterman Hall and yet the destruction of Fiterman Hall was blamed on WTC7 as 
proven by wikipedia where wikipedia states this about Fiterman Hall:

"It was heavily damaged during the September 11 attacks in 2001, when debris 
from the collapse of 7 WTC compromised the structure. It became unsafe to 
occupy due to mold growth and asbestos exposure. Because traditional 
demolition would result in an unacceptable environmental impact, the 
building was scheduled for deconstruction and decontamination as part of the 
Lower Manhattan redevelopment project"

Now what did you see besides a total lack of debris that jumped across the 
street to destroy Fiterman Hall?  <G>

The truth is what really destroyed Fiterman Hall was the radiation from the 
underground nuke used to level WTC7.

Rocky 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#519443

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-09-07 00:38 +0000
Message-ID<3t2vbc-6f5.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#519432
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> I've used the video in this post before to see if someone was Cartoon 
> Physics blind or not.

That's because you are a delusional half wit and a jobless stalker.

The facts are some airliners were hijacked.

Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
almost 2 hours later.

One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
that can be detected anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the 
collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the Pentagon
and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

Everything else is kook babble.

That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.

That there is missing rubble is kook babble.

That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.

That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.

That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
devices is kook babble.

That there was an EMP is kook babble.

That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.

That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
to do with what happened is kook babble.

That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.

That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
or Nagasaki is kook babble.

That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
is kook babble.

That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance 
and still be expected to work is kook babble.

That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
bombs is kook babble.

That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.

That all the video was CGI is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
windows is kook babble.

That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.

That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
is kook babble.

There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.

Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.

Rantings about specially treated dirt is kook babble.

Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
kook babble.

Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.


<snip kook babble>

> The truth is what really destroyed Fiterman Hall was the radiation from the 
> underground nuke used to level WTC7.

Radiation doesn't destroy things, you ignorant, raving nut case, jobless
stalker.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#519467

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-09-07 02:28 +0000
Message-ID<msisnk$utl$2@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#519432
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>The truth is what really destroyed Fiterman Hall was the radiation from the 
>underground nuke used to level WTC7.

I thought you said the nukes used to destroy the WTC didn't produce any
radiation!

Stoopid kooktards.  Can't even keep their own stories straight.

p.s.  Does this look like radiation damage to you?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg

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


#519471 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-09-06 22:25 -0500
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)
Message-ID<i4GdnasI4KWGnnDInZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#519467
astronomy restored
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:msisnk$utl$2@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>The truth is what really destroyed Fiterman Hall was the radiation from 
>>the
>>underground nuke used to level WTC7.
>
> I thought you said the nukes used to destroy the WTC didn't produce any
> radiation!

What I've stated over and over and over again is that there was so much 
radiation the first 3 days that nobody was allowed into GZ in the first 2 
days and then only Iron Workers were allowed on the third day and then after 
that the First Responders still had to wear dosimeter badges and limit their 
time at GZ.


> p.s.  Does this look like radiation damage to you?
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg

From my earlier post when wikipedia stated "decontamination" that looked 
like radiation damage to me you idiot.

Now considering the quote from wikipedia that you removed from the OP 
explain in detail how WTC7 damaged Fiterman Hall when nothing jumped off of 
WTC7 onto FH?  <G>

BTW your complete failure to spot the differences between the WTC7 NIST 
Cartoon and real life proves you can not distinguish Cartoons from real 
life.

Rocky 

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


#519530 — Re: Rocky lies some more

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-09-07 05:57 +0000
SubjectRe: Rocky lies some more
Message-ID<milvbc-pa7.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#519471
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

> What I've stated over and over and over again is that there was so much 
> radiation the first 3 days that nobody was allowed into GZ in the first 2 
> days and then only Iron Workers were allowed on the third day and then after 
> that the First Responders still had to wear dosimeter badges and limit their 
> time at GZ.

All of which is lies and contrary to physics, stalker kook.

If nuclear devices had been used the area would STILL show elevated
radiation levels and HUGE levels after three days, you kook lier.

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

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

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

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




-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#519669 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-09-08 00:48 +0000
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)
Message-ID<mslb8j$jsi$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#519471
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>astronomy restored

You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
unrelated group.

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:msisnk$utl$2@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>The truth is what really destroyed Fiterman Hall was the radiation from 
>>>the
>>>underground nuke used to level WTC7.
>>
>> I thought you said the nukes used to destroy the WTC didn't produce any
>> radiation!

>What I've stated over and over and over again is that there was so much 
>radiation the first 3 days that nobody was allowed into GZ in the first 2 
>days and then only Iron Workers were allowed on the third day and then after 
>that the First Responders still had to wear dosimeter badges and limit their 
>time at GZ.

Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately and
rescued people the next day.

You claim that only iron workers were allowed in on the third day?  WRONG!
The freaking President of the United States was standing on the Pile on
the third day, with NO freaking protection at all, not even a hard hat!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OCgMPX2mE

Stoopid lying kooktards.

Poor you.  Your dog ate the Youtube video of the Geiger counter at the
WTC site!

>> p.s.  Does this look like radiation damage to you?
>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg

>From my earlier post when wikipedia stated "decontamination" that looked 
>like radiation damage to me you idiot.

Well it's not. It's mold and asbestos, fool.

>Now considering the quote from wikipedia that you removed from the OP 
>explain in detail how WTC7 damaged Fiterman Hall when nothing jumped off of 
>WTC7 onto FH?  <G>

Look at the link I gave you. It shows pieces of WTC7 in the street right
next to the damaged part of Fiterman Hall.  This shows to non-kooktards
that WTC7 didn't quite collapse neatly into its footprint, and those
pieces or others that fell into Fiterman Hall did the damage to it.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/WTC_Area_With_Building_Numbers_50dpi.png

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


#519672 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-09-07 20:15 -0500
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)
Message-ID<68adnWkld-a4q3PInZ2dnUU7-VWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#519669
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mslb8j$jsi$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>astronomy restored
>
> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
> unrelated group.

Funny, I didn't see "newsgroup cop" in your description.

>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:msisnk$utl$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>The truth is what really destroyed Fiterman Hall was the radiation from
>>>>the
>>>>underground nuke used to level WTC7.
>>>
>>> I thought you said the nukes used to destroy the WTC didn't produce any
>>> radiation!
>
>>What I've stated over and over and over again is that there was so much
>>radiation the first 3 days that nobody was allowed into GZ in the first 2
>>days and then only Iron Workers were allowed on the third day and then 
>>after
>>that the First Responders still had to wear dosimeter badges and limit 
>>their
>>time at GZ.
>
> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately and
> rescued people the next day.

That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any rescues.

Plus what I heard was from people that went out there so they learned first 
hand what happened.


> You claim that only iron workers were allowed in on the third day?  WRONG!
> The freaking President of the United States was standing on the Pile on
> the third day, with NO freaking protection at all, not even a hard hat!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OCgMPX2mE

Duh.  He had to open up the Stock Market so all those people with put 
options could get their money.

Plus I'll bet he didn't go anywhere near the places where the three nukes 
were detonated.

> Stoopid lying kooktards.

ROTFLMAO because I'm not the one that paid people to say there were jets at 
the Pentagon or in Nuke York City.  Damn you are funny.


> Poor you.  Your dog ate the Youtube video of the Geiger counter at the
> WTC site!
>
>>> p.s.  Does this look like radiation damage to you?
>>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg
>
>>From my earlier post when wikipedia stated "decontamination" that looked
>>like radiation damage to me you idiot.
>
> Well it's not. It's mold and asbestos, fool.
>
>>Now considering the quote from wikipedia that you removed from the OP
>>explain in detail how WTC7 damaged Fiterman Hall when nothing jumped off 
>>of
>>WTC7 onto FH?  <G>
>
> Look at the link I gave you. It shows pieces of WTC7 in the street right
> next to the damaged part of Fiterman Hall.  This shows to non-kooktards
> that WTC7 didn't quite collapse neatly into its footprint, and those
> pieces or others that fell into Fiterman Hall did the damage to it.
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/WTC_Area_With_Building_Numbers_50dpi.png

So, if you look at pictures of Fiterman Hall you do not see debris on it 
from WTC7 but the debris was from Fiterman Hall itself and that is easily 
explained by the fact it was nuked.  More at:

  (indexed to start at 2:27:07)
 http://youtu.be/Lec9giab90I?t=2h27m7s

Rocky 

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


#519684 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-09-08 02:42 +0000
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)
Message-ID<mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#519672
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mslb8j$jsi$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>astronomy restored
>>
>> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
>> unrelated group.

>Funny, I didn't see "newsgroup cop" in your description.

You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
unrelated group.

>>>What I've stated over and over and over again is that there was so much
>>>radiation the first 3 days that nobody was allowed into GZ in the first 2
>>>days and then only Iron Workers were allowed on the third day and then 
>>>after
>>>that the First Responders still had to wear dosimeter badges and limit 
>>>their
>>>time at GZ.
>>
>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately and
>> rescued people the next day.

>That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any rescues.

Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the debris
on the first day.

Instead, you chose to believe the lies that the kookmeisters fed you, that
it was to radioactive for anyone to go in there.

>Plus what I heard
from other kooktards, right?

>> You claim that only iron workers were allowed in on the third day?  WRONG!
>> The freaking President of the United States was standing on the Pile on
>> the third day, with NO freaking protection at all, not even a hard hat!
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OCgMPX2mE

>Duh.  He had to open up the Stock Market so all those people with put 
>options could get their money.

But he did go in there, right?  Without any radiation protection, right?  
This PROVES that you lied, saying that only protected iron workers were
allowed in on the third day.

Stupid lying kooktard!

>Plus I'll bet he didn't go anywhere near the places where the three nukes 
>were detonated.

The whole of Manhattan would be too "hot" for anyone to enter after three
days after three nukes were detonated!  But since there obviously weren't
any nukes at all, Manhattan never was "hot".

>> Look at the link I gave you. It shows pieces of WTC7 in the street right
>> next to the damaged part of Fiterman Hall.  This shows to non-kooktards
>> that WTC7 didn't quite collapse neatly into its footprint, and those
>> pieces or others that fell into Fiterman Hall did the damage to it.
>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/WTC_Area_With_Building_Numbers_50dpi.png

>So, if you look at pictures of Fiterman Hall you do not see debris on it 
>from WTC7 but the debris was from Fiterman Hall itself and that is easily 
>explained by the fact it was nuked.  More at:

There's obvious debris in the street immediately adjacent to the Fiterman
Hall damage!  Admit it.  A chunk of WTC7 fell on Fiterman Hall, collapsing
part of it.

>  (indexed to start at 2:27:07)
> http://youtu.be/Lec9giab90I?t=2h27m7s

Oh, good grief, is that Dimitri Khalezov guy ever kooktarded!  He's even
worse than you!  I watched a few minutes of that kooktardery, enough to
hear this gem: "What happens when it [the nuclear blast wave] hits the 
air?"  "Nothing!"   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!  Of course, he redefined the
nuclear blast wave as a "crushing wave" seconds before.

And again, 4 hours and 16 minutes of kooktardery?  And how many such 
multi-hour videos do you have to brainwash yourselves with??

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


#519687 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind)

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-09-07 22:23 -0500
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind)
Message-ID<a_OdnSaFsra7yXPInZ2dnUU7-TOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#519684
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mslb8j$jsi$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>astronomy restored
>>>
>>> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
>>> unrelated group.
>
>>Funny, I didn't see "newsgroup cop" in your description.
>
> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
> unrelated group.

Funny, I didn't see "newsgroup doctor" in your description either.

>>>>What I've stated over and over and over again is that there was so much
>>>>radiation the first 3 days that nobody was allowed into GZ in the first 
>>>>2
>>>>days and then only Iron Workers were allowed on the third day and then
>>>>after
>>>>that the First Responders still had to wear dosimeter badges and limit
>>>>their
>>>>time at GZ.
>>>
>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately 
>>> and
>>> rescued people the next day.
>
>>That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any rescues.
>
> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the debris
> on the first day.

link?

> Instead, you chose to believe the lies that the kookmeisters fed you, that
> it was to radioactive for anyone to go in there.

too radioactive would be more like it.

>>Plus what I heard
> from other kooktards, right?

ROTFLMAO when you are obviosly one of the kooks that drank the kook aid from 
the media.  The crap about the Pentagon and Prankville, PA was so bogus I 
couldn't see how anybody could fall for it unless they missed the original 
broadcast.

>>> You claim that only iron workers were allowed in on the third day? 
>>> WRONG!
>>> The freaking President of the United States was standing on the Pile on
>>> the third day, with NO freaking protection at all, not even a hard hat!
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OCgMPX2mE
>
>>Duh.  He had to open up the Stock Market so all those people with put
>>options could get their money.
>
> But he did go in there, right?  Without any radiation protection, right?
> This PROVES that you lied, saying that only protected iron workers were
> allowed in on the third day.
>
> Stupid lying kooktard!
>
>>Plus I'll bet he didn't go anywhere near the places where the three nukes
>>were detonated.
>
> The whole of Manhattan would be too "hot" for anyone to enter after three
> days after three nukes were detonated!  But since there obviously weren't
> any nukes at all, Manhattan never was "hot".

Link?

>>> Look at the link I gave you. It shows pieces of WTC7 in the street right
>>> next to the damaged part of Fiterman Hall.  This shows to non-kooktards
>>> that WTC7 didn't quite collapse neatly into its footprint, and those
>>> pieces or others that fell into Fiterman Hall did the damage to it.
>>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/WTC_Area_With_Building_Numbers_50dpi.png
>
>>So, if you look at pictures of Fiterman Hall you do not see debris on it
>>from WTC7 but the debris was from Fiterman Hall itself and that is easily
>>explained by the fact it was nuked.  More at:
>
> There's obvious debris in the street immediately adjacent to the Fiterman
> Hall damage!  Admit it.  A chunk of WTC7 fell on Fiterman Hall, collapsing
> part of it.
>
>>  (indexed to start at 2:27:07)
>> http://youtu.be/Lec9giab90I?t=2h27m7s
>
> Oh, good grief, is that Dimitri Khalezov guy ever kooktarded!  He's even
> worse than you!  I watched a few minutes of that kooktardery, enough to
> hear this gem: "What happens when it [the nuclear blast wave] hits the
> air?"  "Nothing!"   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!  Of course, he redefined the
> nuclear blast wave as a "crushing wave" seconds before.
>
> And again, 4 hours and 16 minutes of kooktardery?  And how many such
> multi-hour videos do you have to brainwash yourselves with??

You want to see tainted videos;  Check out this FOIA video from NIST

NIST FOIA 09-42: R14-UC -- CNN Dub2 01-04 (WTC7 Smoking & Collapse)
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqA46_bX5n0

This video is over 15 minutes and if you watch the smoke itself when the 
smoke jumps all the sudden WTC7 comes down.  NIST or someone did not want us 
to the see a flash from WTC7 that a witness to the event saw so they took 
the flash out of the video and that trick can be seen in a lot of the NIST 
FOIA videos especially those on the side that Fiterman Hall was on.

NIST and the media have been fcuking with us for a long long long time and I 
have noticed that you still have not been able to explain why there were 
walls that stood strong from the Twin Towers when the building was rumored 
to have collapsed down.  Obviously the Towers didn't collapse all the way 
down.  <G>
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Still, until someone can explain why just those parts stood better than 
Dimitri then I have to side with Dimitri as plenty of others do too.

Rocky 

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


#519767 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind)

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-09-08 16:46 +0000
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind)
Message-ID<msn3d2$pn$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#519687
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...

>>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately 
>>>> and
>>>> rescued people the next day.
>>
>>>That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any rescues.
>>
>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the debris
>> on the first day.

>link?

Transcript of CNN Larry King broadcast, 9/12/2001.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/12/lkl.00.html

"There are two hotels in the area that have strong structural problems. 
They may go. Now, this further complicates rescue efforts here. As you 
know, Larry, about the only good news to come out of the city today is 
that rescuers were able to successfully rescue 11 folks trapped in the 
rubble. That included six firefighters, three police officers."

>>>Plus I'll bet he didn't go anywhere near the places where the three nukes
>>>were detonated.
>>
>> The whole of Manhattan would be too "hot" for anyone to enter after three
>> days after three nukes were detonated!  But since there obviously weren't
>> any nukes at all, Manhattan never was "hot".

>Link?

Lots of good stuff at:
http://www.acq.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/nm_book_5_11/appendix_F.htm
nearly all of which contradicts any sort of nuclear device being used on
9/11 (you know, such things as a 1kt nuke (tiny as nukes go) causing
third degree burns to those within 0.7 km and death in days due to 
radiation for those within 0.5 km, and induced radiation by prompt 
neutrons that makes the soil or rock dangerously radioactive for many days,
fallout, etc.
But you won't read it.  You'd rather be brainwashed into becoming one of
the sheeple by watching multiple 4 hour long Youtube videos.

>NIST and the media have been fcuking with us for a long long long time and I 
>have noticed that you still have not been able to explain why there were 
>walls that stood strong from the Twin Towers when the building was rumored 
>to have collapsed down.  Obviously the Towers didn't collapse all the way 
>down.  <G>

Simple.  First the walls were much stronger on the lower levels than on
the upper levels, since the walls on the upper levels didn't have to
support 110 floors like the lowest level did.  Second, a very tall 
unsupported structure (like an exterior wall with the floors removed)
will be very unstable, with the upper portion tending to lean over and
break off.  Once the upper portion has broken off, the remaining shorter
portion is more stable.  This process may repeat a few times.  You can
see in the videos of the collapses the outer wall panels leaning over,
breaking off and falling.  The wall sections that remained standing were 
short and stout enough not to fall. There are kids' games that demonstrate 
this process.

>Still, until someone can explain why just those parts stood better than 
>Dimitri then I have to side with Dimitri as plenty of others do too.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!  I am still laughing over his absolute stupidity!! "What
happens when it [the nuclear blast wave] hits the air?"  "Nothing!"
HAHAHAH!!!  How can he be so stupid?  And how can you be so kooktarded to
actually believe that guy?  I hope you kooktards didn't pay him for that
"expert" interview, if you did, you got totally ripped off.  On the other
hand, you know what they say about fools and their money...

"What happens when it [the nuclear blast wave] hits the air?"  "Nothing!"   
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!  I'm going to be laughing for days!!

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


#519771 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-09-08 12:24 -0500
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)
Message-ID<r-idnd2Wjvy2hHLInZ2dnUU7-VudnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#519767
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:msn3d2$pn$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...
>
>>>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately
>>>>> and
>>>>> rescued people the next day.
>>>
>>>>That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any 
>>>>rescues.
>>>
>>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the 
>>> debris
>>> on the first day.
>
>>link?
>
> Transcript of CNN Larry King broadcast, 9/12/2001.

riiight.  Do you really expect me to look at anything from one of the 
networks that helped to lie about jets in Nuke York City?

And don't forget what the real issue is.

NIST was paid 10 million dollars -not- to address what was left standing at 
the base of the Twin Towers.

If NIST was paid 10 million dollars how much do you think it cost to have 
seismic readings that lack the reading from when the North Tower shook like 
a tuning fork?

As for the radiation.  I've addressed that too but basically it was one 
piece of steel was sent in to be tested and who knows where that steel came 
from?

Now back to the Evasive NIST that earned 10 million dollars for the simple 
remark: "global collapse then ensued"

Check out:
 https://www.google.com/search?q=global+collapse+then+ensued

Rocky 

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


#519778 — Re: Rocky still deluded

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-09-08 18:08 +0000
SubjectRe: Rocky still deluded
Message-ID<npk3cc-p1l.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#519771
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
> news:msn3d2$pn$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>
>>>>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> rescued people the next day.
>>>>
>>>>>That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any 
>>>>>rescues.
>>>>
>>>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the 
>>>> debris
>>>> on the first day.
>>
>>>link?
>>
>> Transcript of CNN Larry King broadcast, 9/12/2001.
> 
> riiight.  Do you really expect me to look at anything from one of the 
> networks that helped to lie about jets in Nuke York City?
> 
> And don't forget what the real issue is.
> 
> NIST was paid 10 million dollars -not- to address what was left standing at 
> the base of the Twin Towers.
> 
> If NIST was paid 10 million dollars how much do you think it cost to have 
> seismic readings that lack the reading from when the North Tower shook like 
> a tuning fork?

Given the number of seismographs around the world, a lot in countries
not at all friendly with the US, likely billions to bribe that many
people, kook.

Found a job yet, kook?

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#519910 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2015-09-09 06:41 +0200
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)
Message-ID<02f4b4eccb22f47ffe9d0c28867ffa4c@dizum.com>
In reply to#519771
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
woman-stalking truck crashing kook), in
<news:r-idnd2Wjvy2hHLInZ2dnUU7-VudnZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:

> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
> news:msn3d2$pn$1@pcls7.std.com...

>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
>> woman-stalking truck crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>> news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...

>>>>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately
>>>>>> and rescued people the next day.

>>>>>That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any 
>>>>>rescues.

>>>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the 
>>>> debris on the first day.

>>>link?

>> Transcript of CNN Larry King broadcast, 9/12/2001.

Doh! Did Retard Roger just get proven wrong by testimony from
eyewitnesses who were actually *doing* the search and rescue, then
snipped out the evidence so his broken little brain didn't have to
admit *he* *is* *wrong*... poor stoooopid Roger 'Dumb As A Rock'
Wittekind. He's not even smart enough to discern fantasy from reality.
LOL

> riii<SMACKAKOOK!>

> As for the radiation.  I've addressed that too but basically it was one 
> piece of steel was sent in to be tested and who knows where that steel came 
> from?

Bullshit, and you know it, Roger.

Radiation monitoring started the very day of the attacks, before the
towers ever fell. Performed first by Richard Borri and continued in
October 2001 non-stop by Environmental Measurements Laboratory (under
the DOE, now known as the National Urban Security Technology
Laboratory) and OSHA (regional and federal) until clean-up at the WTC
site was completed. Given that OSHA was in 6 WTC (Room 881), they were
on-scene immediately.

<http://www.si.edu/mci/downloads/articles/wtc_dust.pdf>
"Similarly no ionizing radiation has been detected at the site."

On top of that, there are several places you can go to determine that
there were no nuclear weapon detonation byproducts. Here's a couple:

<http://www2.epa.gov/radnet/near-real-time-and-laboratory-data-state>
No increase in radiation levels above background except for trace beta
(tritium in exit signs and LEO weapons sights) and alpha (radium from
pharmacologic laboratory), from the day before the WTC attack to the
day after cleanup completed, as measured at the NYC EML station.

<http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_query>
Again, no increase from the NYC monitoring stations.

In addition, several outside groups were present at various times at
the WTC site to take radiation readings.

NO radiation over background was found (not just at the WTC site, but
throughout all of NYC) for anything other than slightly greater than
background beta radiation from nano-curie concentrations of tritium in
aircraft exit signs and LEO weapons sights, and almost imperceptibly
greater than background alpha radiation from radium (which was related
to industrial processes in a pharmacologic lab in the WTC complex, not
nuclear weapons).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
<http://www.brazoshealth.org/sites/all/themes/health/images/pdfs/messages_in_the_dust.pdf>
============================================================
Once the event had been declared an act of terrorism, the first
response was to send in inspectors to check the air and debris to make
sure there were no signs of radiation or radioactive cargo, says
McKinney.

A major concern was that terrorists could have unleashed a so-called
"dirty bomb", an explosive device containing radioactive compounds
like cesium. Within minutes of the crash, McKinney sent a radiological
health inspector to check the site for any radiation sources. He
reached Richard Borri, a senior scientist in the department's office
of Radiological Health, who like most people from DOH, was on his way
to work when the first tower was hit.

Borri checked the World Trade Center site for signs of radiation
before and after the collapse of the buildings. Radiation could have
originated in industrial radiology sources, such as the installing
beams of the huge office buildings, which may have contained some
radioactive elements from x-rays taken, and from depleted uranium used
in ballasts in aircraft wing tips (such counterweights in airplane
wing tips give the most weight for least volume, says Borri). It might
also be left from any medical or dental offices. The far more serious
threat, of course, was the chance that one of the hijackers might have
carried a suitcase of radioactive materials or a dirty bomb, a
conventional bomb spiked with radioactive material. Such a bomb has
been compared to TNT, strapped to a container of plutonium or
plutonium-contaminated waste. This kind of a device would not produce
a nuclear explosion, but it could spread deadly radioactive matter
across a swath of city. According to Borri, the fear with a dirty bomb
is that hundreds, maybe thousands, could die from radiation poisoning
and cancer, and the area could be poisoned for years. (Plutonium-239
has a half-life of 24,000 years, says Borri.)

That was fortunately not the case, Borri found, using a portable
liquid scintillation counter, which measures radioactivity like a
Geiger counter. The high-tech portable gadget he carried, one of the
few available in the United States, is far more precise than its
century-old cousin, the Geiger counter with a much more refined
ability to detect any kind of radioactivity.

"If you're creative you can get what you need to without getting in
another agency's way pulling samples," says Borri, who was dodging
fire trucks and police vehicles and hordes of people streaming out of
the building. "It's not a good idea to walk into the center of the
action. Some of the people weren't walking as slowly as I was."

Although Borri didn't turn up any problematic radioactive readings by
the end of the day, his work would be supplemented by the federal
Department of Energy, whose technicians remained on site and continued
to sample.

[Only during the last days of the Ground Zero cleanup would
radioactive testers find any evidence of radioactive emissions, from a
pharmacy laboratory located within one of the buildings.]
============================================================
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Further proving your schizophrenic paranoid-delusional rantings wrong:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
<http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Hard-Evidence-Rebudiates-the-Hypothesis-that-Mini-Nukes-were-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf>
===============
The data clearly demonstrate the large amount of tritium released due
to hydrogen bombs, the first of which was tested in 1951. Thus,
tritium is a tracer for hydrogen bombs, the "smoking gun." Can
proponents of the WTC-mini-nuke hypothesis explain how large releases
of tritium did NOT happen on 9/11/2001?

Sediment cores pulled from the Hudson River near the World Trade
Center site just a month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks
contain a thin layer of metal-rich ash and pulverized debris. The top
3 cm of silt contained layers with unnaturally high concentrations of
copper, strontium, and zinc from the towers, says Sarah D. Oktay, a
geochemist. "Oktay and her colleagues also found that the sediments
contain small but measurable quantities of iodine-131, a human-made
radioactive isotope with a half-life of about 8 days. Total iodine
concentrations were actually lower in the [WTC] debris-filled layers,
which means the source of the element probably isn't related to the
attacks."

Radionuclides. We analyzed the gamma spectrum of the samples using an
EG&G/Ortec high-purity Ge detector (50% relative efficiency) gamma
counter (EG&G/Ortec Instruments, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN). We analyzed
approximately 50 peaks based on statistical significance
(counting/lack of interferences). These included thorium, uranium,
actinium series, and primordial radionuclides. Liquid scintillation
analyses were conducted for emissions on the total dust and smoke
samples using a Packard Tri-Carb Model 2770 TR/SL (Packard Instrument,
Meriden, CT). The MDA for alpha radioactivity was 0.30 DPM (0.14 pCi)
based on a NIST-traceable 226Ra standard (National Institute of
Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD).

Results. We found only background levels of alpha radionuclide
activity by liquid scintillation counter analysis of all three
samples. Beta activity was slightly elevated, but not more than twice
the background level. There were no levels of gamma activity > 1 Bq/g
except for naturally occurring potassium-40. These very low levels of
radioactive isotopes (radionuclides) in the WTC dust are by themselves
sufficient to rule out the use of atomic bombs (even as triggers) at
the WTC, which could be construed as an absurd notion as it confronts
the empirical facts.
===============

{NOTE: The elevated beta radiation was likely just as I stated, the
tritium from the airplane exit signs and law enforcement weapon
sights. Beta particles are nothing more than high-energy electrons.}

- Observation of tritium (an important component of hydrogen-bomb
fuel) at WTC sites at the few nano-curie level only. This is strong
evidence against the mini-nuke hypothesis.

- The fact that radioactive iodine concentrations were actually lower
in the upper/WTC debris-filled layers.

- Radioactive hot-spots in NYC were found to be due to radium, which
is traceable to industrial uses (not bombs). This in itself does not
rule out mini-nukes, but these data certainly do not support the
mini-nuke hypothesis.

- Lioy et al. report that radioactivity from thorium, uranium,
actinium series and other radionuclides is at or near the background
level for WTC dust.

- Nuclear activation or residual "fall-out" radioactivity (above
background) was NOT observed, in tests performed by the author on
actual WTC samples. This result is consistent with the low Iodine-131
measured by independent researchers (point 2 above) and the low
radionuclide counts (point 4 above) and again provides compelling
evidence against the mini-nuke-at-Towers hypothesis.

- No fatalities due to radiation "burning" were reported near ground
zero. William Rodriguez survived the North Tower collapse. No observed
melting of glass due to the collapse-process of the Towers.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

<https://archive.org/details/NIST_WTC_Repository>
<https://archive.org/details/NIST_WTC_Document_Repository>
<https://archive.org/details/NIST_WTC_Organized_Video_Repository>

The NIST reports... the real reason the WTC towers fell: inadequate
and untested construction technique utilizing rubber viscoelastic
damper components to hold structural steel components in alignment;
inadequate SFRM and unorthodox application of original Blaze-Shield
DC/F and later-applied Blaze-Shield II SFRM; high variability in SFRM
depth (ie: non-uniform SFRM coverage) and thus effective reduction of
SFRM thermal equivalent thickness; low specific-heat capacity due to
structure being built to minimize use of concrete; dislodgement of
SFRM during aircraft impact; lack of fire endurance testing of a
similar construction and fireproofing setup as the WTC towers had;
failure of sprinkler system.

Moron. LOL

-- 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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]


#519986 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-09-09 17:32 +0000
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)
Message-ID<mspqfc$sjq$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#519771
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:msn3d2$pn$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...

>>>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the 
>>>> debris
>>>> on the first day.
>>
>>>link?
>>
>> Transcript of CNN Larry King broadcast, 9/12/2001.

>riiight.  Do you really expect me to look at anything from one of the 
>networks that helped to lie about jets in Nuke York City?

Burying your head in the sand, I see.  Is that how kooktards stay 
kooktarded, they simply refuse to look at evidence that proves them wrong?

>And don't forget what the real issue is.

Yup.  The real issue is that a bunch of crazed suicidal hijackers crashed
planes into the twin towers, starting fires that weakened the relatively
flimsy structures so they collapsed top down, killing thousands and
destroying the entire complex.

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


#520017 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-09-09 17:20 -0500
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)
Message-ID<weadnantNrh4LW3InZ2dnUU7-cudnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#519986
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mspqfc$sjq$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:msn3d2$pn$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...
>
>>>>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the
>>>>> debris
>>>>> on the first day.
>>>
>>>>link?
>>>
>>> Transcript of CNN Larry King broadcast, 9/12/2001.
>
>>riiight.  Do you really expect me to look at anything from one of the
>>networks that helped to lie about jets in Nuke York City?
>
> Burying your head in the sand, I see.  Is that how kooktards stay
> kooktarded, they simply refuse to look at evidence that proves them wrong?
>
>>And don't forget what the real issue is.
>
> Yup.  The real issue is that a bunch of crazed suicidal hijackers crashed
> planes into the twin towers, starting fires that weakened the relatively
> flimsy structures so they collapsed top down, killing thousands and
> destroying the entire complex.

ROTFLMAO because you just proved you are easily fooled by free standing 
walls instead of piles of debris that should have been much higher than the 
free standing walls of the Twin Towers.
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Go ahead look it up yourself.  What percentage of a building is left behind 
after a collapse or a controlled demolition?

Rocky 

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


#520074 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2015-09-10 03:07 +0000
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued)
Message-ID<msqs61$gh9$2@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#520017
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>Go ahead look it up yourself.  What percentage of a building is left behind 
>after a collapse or a controlled demolition?

Let's see.  The towers were 95% air when they stood.  1368 feet*.05=68.4
feet.  Of course, the mass of the towers won't pack down with no voids
in the rubble, and that will increase the height.  On the other hand,
much of the debris fell outside the footprint of the base of the towers,
covering more area, and that will decrease the height of the debris pile.  
As an approximation, we can say these two effects pretty much cancel and
we're left with the original figure of close to 70 feet deep.  That's the
depth of the bathtub so we'd expect the pile to reach close to street
level or the original plaza level.  And guess what?  That's the level
of the debris we see in that picture of all the debris that you keep
harping about!

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


#519773 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael runs from the same issue NIST ran from)

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2015-09-08 12:39 -0500
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael runs from the same issue NIST ran from)
Message-ID<V7SdnfUJsIlHgXLInZ2dnUU7-b2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#519767
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:msn3d2$pn$1@pcls7.std.com...
>
> "What happens when it [the nuclear blast wave] hits the air?"  "Nothing!"
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!  I'm going to be laughing for days!!

Sorry dude that argument only throws out the mini-nukes theory and not the 
use of deep underground nukes that didn't have much of an atmosphere to 
start an air blast wave.

And you conveniently forgot the other side of the equation.  How does a 
"global Collapse" leave so little on the ground and then what it leaves was 
left standing?

Funny that you and NIST both run from that issue but NIST earned 10 million 
to run from that issue and I hope that makes you feel better.

Rocky 

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


#519698 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2015-09-08 06:41 +0200
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)
Message-ID<0ef56e81a34afeb7f0ddc481aa846d7a@dizum.com>
In reply to#519684
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Michael Moroney, in <news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com> did thusly jump
head first into the wood chipper again:

> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
> woman-stalking truck crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>> news:mslb8j$jsi$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
>>> woman-stalking truck crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>>>> astronomy restored

>>> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
>>> unrelated group.

>> Funny, I didn't see "newsgroup cop" in your description.

> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
> unrelated group.

>>>> Wha<SMACKAKOOK!>

>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately and
>>> rescued people the next day.

>> Tha<SMACKAKOOK!>

> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the debris
> on the first day.
> 
> Instead, you chose to believe the lies that the kookmeisters fed you, that
> it was to radioactive for anyone to go in there.

>> Plu<SMACKAKOOK!>
> from other kooktards, right?

>>> You claim that only iron workers were allowed in on the third day?  WRONG!
>>> The freaking President of the United States was standing on the Pile on
>>> the third day, with NO freaking protection at all, not even a hard hat!
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OCgMPX2mE

>> Duh<SMACKAKOOK!>

> But he did go in there, right?  Without any radiation protection, right?  
> This PROVES that you lied, saying that only protected iron workers were
> allowed in on the third day.
> 
> Stupid lying kooktard!

>> Plu<SMACKAKOOK!>

> The whole of Manhattan would be too "hot" for anyone to enter after three
> days after three nukes were detonated!  But since there obviously weren't
> any nukes at all, Manhattan never was "hot".

Wait, the retard Roger Wittekind is back to only 3 nuclear weapons
now? After he k'lamed dozens of nuclear weapons were detonated?

If your kooky conspiracy theory has to keep changing in a perfect
example of your broken brain writhing as it tries to impart even an
iota of plausibility to your kooky conspiracy theory, Roger, your
kooky conspiracy theory cannot reflect reality.

You're either an undiagnosed paranoid-delusional schizophrenic, or
you're a diagnosed paranoid-delusional schizophrenic who refuses to
take his meds. Either way, you're in the grip of a progressive mental
illness that is causing your broken brain to become more and more
irate at the US government you blame for 9/11. As such, you'll soon
become a danger either to yourself, to others, or to national
security. And you're pissing off some very powerful people.

So you're on the radar of agents at a local to federal level now,
Roger. You'll likely notice strange occurrences such as returning home
to find items slightly out of place (a result of covert agents
entering your home to plant surveillance equipment), seemingly random
glitches on your computer (a result of rootkit keystroke and screencap
monitor placement on your computer), seemingly odd traceroutes that
often route through Herndon, VA or Washington, DC (a result of federal
agents implementing a long-term MITM attack via PRISM against you to
monitor every single byte of data you send and receive), and strange
background noise on your phone (a result of rerouting your calls
through the federal wiretap surveillance system).

You will soon be given psychological testing, although you will not
know it is taking place... but you should probably beware strangers.

You may find the taste of your food and water seems slightly
altered... a result of anti-psychotic and brain-washing drugs being
introduced into your food and water.

You'll also find people you know seem strangely quiet around you, and
they'll seem coy about the cause of their reluctance to engage in
certain conversations... a result of their being asked to hide the
fact that a case is being built against you so you can be locked away
as an enemy of the state.

Yer welcome, Roger. Your broken brain has no idea the shitstorm headed
its way, all brought on by posting your schizophrenic government
hating lies to Usenet.

<snicker>

-- 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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]


#519908 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2015-09-09 06:11 +0200
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)
Message-ID<dee6c6864b18d113601fb04140fe2419@dizum.com>
In reply to#519698
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, in
<news:0ef56e81a34afeb7f0ddc481aa846d7a@dizum.com> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> Michael Moroney, in <news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com> did thusly jump
> head first into the wood chipper again:

>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
>> woman-stalking truck crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>>> news:mslb8j$jsi$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>> Rocky (aka Roger Wittekind the schizophrenic paranoid-delusional
>>>> woman-stalking truck crashing kook) <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>>>>> astronomy restored

>>>> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
>>>> unrelated group.

>>> Fu<SMACKAKOOK!>

>> You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
>> unrelated group.

>>>>> Wha<SMACKAKOOK!>

>>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately and
>>>> rescued people the next day.

>>> Tha<SMACKAKOOK!>

>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the debris
>> on the first day.
>> 
>> Instead, you chose to believe the lies that the kookmeisters fed you, that
>> it was to radioactive for anyone to go in there.

>>> Plu<SMACKAKOOK!>
>> from other kooktards, right?

>>>> You claim that only iron workers were allowed in on the third day?  WRONG!
>>>> The freaking President of the United States was standing on the Pile on
>>>> the third day, with NO freaking protection at all, not even a hard hat!
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OCgMPX2mE

>>> Duh<SMACKAKOOK!>

>> But he did go in there, right?  Without any radiation protection, right?  
>> This PROVES that you lied, saying that only protected iron workers were
>> allowed in on the third day.
>> 
>> Stupid lying kooktard!

>>> Plu<SMACKAKOOK!>

>> The whole of Manhattan would be too "hot" for anyone to enter after three
>> days after three nukes were detonated!  But since there obviously weren't
>> any nukes at all, Manhattan never was "hot".

> Wait, the retard Roger Wittekind is back to only 3 nuclear weapons
> now? After he k'lamed dozens of nuclear weapons were detonated?
> 
> If your kooky conspiracy theory has to keep changing in a perfect
> example of your broken brain writhing as it tries to impart even an
> iota of plausibility to your kooky conspiracy theory, Roger, your
> kooky conspiracy theory cannot reflect reality.
> 
> You're either an undiagnosed paranoid-delusional schizophrenic, or
> you're a diagnosed paranoid-delusional schizophrenic who refuses to
> take his meds. Either way, you're in the grip of a progressive mental
> illness that is causing your broken brain to become more and more
> irate at the US government you blame for 9/11. As such, you'll soon
> become a danger either to yourself, to others, or to national
> security. And you're pissing off some very powerful people.
> 
> So you're on the radar of agents at a local to federal level now,
> Roger. You'll likely notice strange occurrences such as returning home
> to find items slightly out of place (a result of covert agents
> entering your home to plant surveillance equipment), seemingly random
> glitches on your computer (a result of rootkit keystroke and screencap
> monitor placement on your computer), seemingly odd traceroutes that
> often route through Herndon, VA or Washington, DC (a result of federal
> agents implementing a long-term MITM attack via PRISM against you to
> monitor every single byte of data you send and receive), and strange
> background noise on your phone (a result of rerouting your calls
> through the federal wiretap surveillance system).
> 
> You will soon be given psychological testing, although you will not
> know it is taking place... but you should probably beware strangers.
> 
> You may find the taste of your food and water seems slightly
> altered... a result of anti-psychotic and brain-washing drugs being
> introduced into your food and water.
> 
> You'll also find people you know seem strangely quiet around you, and
> they'll seem coy about the cause of their reluctance to engage in
> certain conversations... a result of their being asked to hide the
> fact that a case is being built against you so you can be locked away
> as an enemy of the state.
> 
> Yer welcome, Roger. Your broken brain has no idea the shitstorm headed
> its way, all brought on by posting your schizophrenic government
> hating lies to Usenet.
> 
> <snicker>

RIP Barry Jennings
RIP Beverly Eckert
RIP Kenneth Johannemann
RIP Michael Doran
RIP Christopher Landis
RIP Bertha Champagne
RIP Paul Smith
RIP Deborah Palfrey
RIP Major General David Wherley
RIP Salvatore Princiotta
RIP David Graham
RIP Roger Wittekind

<snicker>

-- 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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]


#519717 — Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2015-09-08 03:57 -0500
SubjectRe: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind)
Message-ID<0l8tuatt4805ib6iioc57ugqb7j2aevj9f@4ax.com>
In reply to#519669
On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 00:48:19 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

>"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>astronomy restored
>
>You really need to see a shrink about your obsession with posting to an
>unrelated group.
>

     I've pointed this out to Roger as well. I don't think he's able
to understand.

>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>>news:msisnk$utl$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>The truth is what really destroyed Fiterman Hall was the radiation from 
>>>>the underground nuke used to level WTC7.
>>>
>>> I thought you said the nukes used to destroy the WTC didn't produce any
>>> radiation!
>
>>What I've stated over and over and over again is that there was so much 
>>radiation the first 3 days that nobody was allowed into GZ in the first 2 
>>days and then only Iron Workers were allowed on the third day and then after 
>>that the First Responders still had to wear dosimeter badges and limit their 
>>time at GZ.
>
>Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately and
>rescued people the next day.
>

     Roger doesn't like the truth for some reason.

>You claim that only iron workers were allowed in on the third day?  WRONG!
>The freaking President of the United States was standing on the Pile on
>the third day, with NO freaking protection at all, not even a hard hat!
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7OCgMPX2mE
>
>Stoopid lying kooktards.
>

     His failure to wear PPE was kind of dumb, but it does help to
further prove Roger wrong.

>Poor you.  Your dog ate the Youtube video of the Geiger counter at the
>WTC site!
>

     It likely never existed outside of Roger's mind.

>>> p.s.  Does this look like radiation damage to you?
>>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg
>
>>From my earlier post when wikipedia stated "decontamination" that looked 
>>like radiation damage to me you idiot.
>
>Well it's not. It's mold and asbestos, fool.
>

     Roger knows this, but his mind is such that he will never be able
to accept the truth.

>>Now considering the quote from wikipedia that you removed from the OP 
>>explain in detail how WTC7 damaged Fiterman Hall when nothing jumped off of 
>>WTC7 onto FH?  <G>
>
>Look at the link I gave you. It shows pieces of WTC7 in the street right
>next to the damaged part of Fiterman Hall.  This shows to non-kooktards
>that WTC7 didn't quite collapse neatly into its footprint, and those
>pieces or others that fell into Fiterman Hall did the damage to it.
>https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/WTC_Area_With_Building_Numbers_50dpi.png

     You can be sure he's seen it, but will not be able to admit what
it means.

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

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


Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web