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

Groups > sci.physics > #520878 > unrolled thread

THE 9/11 HOAX - Fourteen Years on

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  THE 9/11 HOAX - Fourteen Years on "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 19:07 -0500
    Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 00:39 +0000
      Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-13 20:17 -0500
      Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 13:03 -0400
        Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 17:27 +0000
        Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 13:05 -0500
        Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 14:38 -0400
          Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 14:55 -0400
            Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 15:42 -0400
              Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 15:59 -0400
              Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 16:02 -0400
                Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 16:15 -0400
                Re: Bast is also crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 20:21 +0000
                  Re: Bast is also crazy Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 16:41 -0400
                    Re: Bast is also crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 21:57 +0000
                      Re: Bast is also crazy Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 19:30 -0400
                        Re: Bast is also crazy "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 19:47 -0400
                          Re: Bast is also crazy Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 19:55 -0400
                            Re: Bast is also crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 00:25 +0000
                              Re: Bast is also crazy Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 21:32 -0400
                                Re: Bast is also crazy Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 12:01 +1000
                                  9/11 was an inside job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 22:18 -0400
                                    Re: 9/11 was an inside job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 21:55 -0500
                                      Re: 9/11 was an inside job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 06:02 -0400
                                        Re: 9/11 was an inside job BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-16 07:56 -0400
                                          Re: 9/11 was an inside job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-16 12:20 -0400
                                            Re: 9/11 was an inside job BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-16 18:37 -0400
                                            Re: 9/11 was an inside job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:00 -0500
                                        Re: 9/11 was an inside job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 04:00 -0500
                                    Re: 9/11 was an inside job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 22:58 -0400
                              Re: Bast is also crazy "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:01 -0500
                            Re: Bast is also crazy BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 20:52 -0400
                              Re: Bast is also crazy Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-15 23:00 -0400
                                Re: Bast is also crazy BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 23:39 -0400
                              Re: Bast is also crazy "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:02 -0500
                                Re: Bast is also crazy BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 23:40 -0400
                            Re: Bast is also crazy "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 21:21 -0400
                          Re: Bast is also crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 00:22 +0000
                Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-15 20:44 +0000
                Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:00 -0500
            Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 20:08 +0000
            Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:00 -0500
    Re: THE 9/11 HOAX - Fourteen Years on burfordtjustice <burford@uk.mo> - 2015-09-14 03:37 -0400
      Re: Rocky's firing jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 16:06 +0000
      Re: THE 9/11 HOAX - Fourteen Years on "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:44 -0500

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

#521402 — Re: Bast is also crazy

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:32:49 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:25:15 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
>>In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>>>>>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>>>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
>>>>>>> your expertise in these discussions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Sarah Ehrett
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
>>>>>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
>>>>>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
>>>>
>>>>I'm not sure 
>>> 
>>> Missile type and platform?    
>>> 
>>> Still waiting for your answer. 
>>
>>You will never get such an answer from any 9/11 lunatic, at least not
>>one that makes the slightes sense.
>>
>>You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no pictue
>>of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile. 
>> 
>>Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said, the
>>logic is insane.
>
>I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the question
>of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never was a
>missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question frustrates them
>and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.  

One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed it was a
AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the engine from an AGM-86
looks like this:
http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html

and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg

the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.

Shill #2
--
"stonium barium niabate... is actually a bunch of crystals
 that are perfect 3D holograms."
  Roger Wittekind (Rocky) - alt.conspiracy 28 Sep 2013

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

#521404 — 9/11 was an inside job

Government Shill #2 wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:32:49 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:25:15 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>>>>>>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>>>>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jim,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to
>>>>>>>> have your expertise in these discussions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Sarah Ehrett
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the
>>>>>>> lines of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane
>>>>>>> uncontrolable" was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure
>>>>
>>>> Missile type and platform?
>>>>
>>>> Still waiting for your answer.
>>>
>>> You will never get such an answer from any 9/11 lunatic, at least not
>>> one that makes the slightes sense.
>>>
>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no pictue
>>> of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
>>>
>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said,
>>> the logic is insane.
>>
>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the question
>> of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never was a
>> missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question frustrates them
>> and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
>
> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed it
> was a AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the engine
> from an AGM-86 looks like this:
> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
>
> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
>
> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
>
> Shill #2




No one ever made that claim in this thread.
And I think you should show us pictures of the 767 engines that you claim 
hit the pentagon.

As for me answering any other questions,....It's going to cost you from now 
on, unless I choose to offer a freebie like this link

9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg

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

#521408 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:18:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

[...]

>>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no pictue
>>>> of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
>>>>
>>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said,
>>>> the logic is insane.
>>>
>>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the question
>>> of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never was a
>>> missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question frustrates them
>>> and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
>>
>> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed it
>> was a AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the engine
>> from an AGM-86 looks like this:
>> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
>>
>> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
>> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
>>
>> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
>>
>> Shill #2
>
>
>
>No one ever made that claim in this thread.

     Since #2 didn't claim anyone did, your comment makes no sense.
     What TRUTH are you trying to divert attention from?

>And I think you should show us pictures of the 767 engines that you claim 
>hit the pentagon.

     Who claims it was a 767? In reality, please.
     Where are the pictures of the missile?

>
>As for me answering any other questions,....It's going to cost you from now 
>on, unless I choose to offer a freebie like this link
>
>9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
>

     Starting at the 1:09 mark, you can see the AA flight 77! Sweet!
     So much for your LIE about a missile. The video YOU link to
PROVES your claim wrong.

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

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

#521439 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:18:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no
>>>>> pictue of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said,
>>>>> the logic is insane.
>>>>
>>>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the
>>>> question of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never
>>>> was a missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question
>>>> frustrates them and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
>>>
>>> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed it
>>> was a AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the engine
>>> from an AGM-86 looks like this:
>>> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
>>>
>>> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
>>> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
>>>
>>> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
>>>
>>> Shill #2
>>
>>
>>
>> No one ever made that claim in this thread.
>
>     Since #2 didn't claim anyone did, your comment makes no sense.
>     What TRUTH are you trying to divert attention from?
>
>> And I think you should show us pictures of the 767 engines that you
>> claim hit the pentagon.
>
>     Who claims it was a 767? In reality, please.
>     Where are the pictures of the missile?
>
>>
>> As for me answering any other questions,....It's going to cost you
>> from now on, unless I choose to offer a freebie like this link
>>
>> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
>>
>
>     Starting at the 1:09 mark, you can see the AA flight 77! Sweet!
>     So much for your LIE about a missile. The video YOU link to
> PROVES your claim wrong.








9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg




Do you know how stupid you will look to anyone who watches the video at this 
point ?
And all they can see is a missile, too small to be a 767 plane

Once again you are showing the fallacies of the 9/11 fairytale, and the 
level of desperation some people will go to not to have to admit that their 
own government covered the true facts up.

Thanks for the help.

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

#521442 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

In article <mtbejv$d14$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
> 
> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:18:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no
> >>>>> pictue of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said,
> >>>>> the logic is insane.
> >>>>
> >>>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the
> >>>> question of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never
> >>>> was a missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question
> >>>> frustrates them and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
> >>>
> >>> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed it
> >>> was a AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the engine
> >>> from an AGM-86 looks like this:
> >>> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
> >>>
> >>> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
> >>> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
> >>>
> >>> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
> >>>
> >>> Shill #2
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> No one ever made that claim in this thread.
> >
> >     Since #2 didn't claim anyone did, your comment makes no sense.
> >     What TRUTH are you trying to divert attention from?
> >
> >> And I think you should show us pictures of the 767 engines that you
> >> claim hit the pentagon.
> >
> >     Who claims it was a 767? In reality, please.
> >     Where are the pictures of the missile?
> >
> >>
> >> As for me answering any other questions,....It's going to cost you
> >> from now on, unless I choose to offer a freebie like this link
> >>
> >> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
> >>
> >
> >     Starting at the 1:09 mark, you can see the AA flight 77! Sweet!
> >     So much for your LIE about a missile. The video YOU link to
> > PROVES your claim wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know how stupid you will look to anyone who watches the video at this 
> point ?

He won't look stupid at all, but you always do. it's the way you are.

> And all they can see is a missile, too small to be a 767 plane

No, that's not what you see.

> 
> Once again you are showing the fallacies of the 9/11 fairytale, and the 
> level of desperation some people will go to not to have to admit that their 
> own government covered the true facts up.

It's just showing the madness, stupidity and gullibility of the Troofer.

> 
> Thanks for the help.

It's our duty, and it's fun.

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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

#521465 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

BDK wrote:
> In article <mtbejv$d14$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
>>
>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:18:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no
>>>>>>> pictue of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I
>>>>>>> said, the logic is insane.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the
>>>>>> question of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never
>>>>>> was a missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question
>>>>>> frustrates them and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed
>>>>> it was a AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the
>>>>> engine from an AGM-86 looks like this:
>>>>> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
>>>>>
>>>>> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
>>>>> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Shill #2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No one ever made that claim in this thread.
>>>
>>>     Since #2 didn't claim anyone did, your comment makes no sense.
>>>     What TRUTH are you trying to divert attention from?
>>>
>>>> And I think you should show us pictures of the 767 engines that you
>>>> claim hit the pentagon.
>>>
>>>     Who claims it was a 767? In reality, please.
>>>     Where are the pictures of the missile?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> As for me answering any other questions,....It's going to cost you
>>>> from now on, unless I choose to offer a freebie like this link
>>>>
>>>> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
>>>>
>>>
>>>     Starting at the 1:09 mark, you can see the AA flight 77! Sweet!
>>>     So much for your LIE about a missile. The video YOU link to
>>> PROVES your claim wrong.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you know how stupid you will look to anyone who watches the video
>> at this point ?
>
> He won't look stupid at all, but you always do. it's the way you are.
>
>> And all they can see is a missile, too small to be a 767 plane
>
> No, that's not what you see.
>
>>
>> Once again you are showing the fallacies of the 9/11 fairytale, and the
>> level of desperation some people will go to not to have to admit that
>> their own government covered the true facts up.
>
> It's just showing the madness, stupidity and gullibility of the Troofer.
>
>>
>> Thanks for the help.
>
> It's our duty, and it's fun.







Aren't you just so clever to have to quote mine and  change around the 
wording of  my and others posts to  suit your agenda.
The 9/11 official fairytale committee must really be proud of you.
Not to mention how impressed many people reading this will be that you find 
9/11 so much fun.

You keep proving that only deception and obfuscation, and outright insults 
of good little citizens like you,  is what allowed 9/11 to take place to 
begin with.


BUT,....I'm still posting, and others will keep reading the truth.
And you help keep 9/11 front and center by making sure posts grow into 
threads that  cover pages and last for weeks.

The more attention you give me,....the more people are noticing, and 
starting to do their own research.

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

#521542 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

In article <mtc4p5$505$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
> 
> BDK wrote:
> > In article <mtbejv$d14$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says...
> >>
> >> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:18:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>>>>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no
> >>>>>>> pictue of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I
> >>>>>>> said, the logic is insane.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the
> >>>>>> question of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never
> >>>>>> was a missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question
> >>>>>> frustrates them and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed
> >>>>> it was a AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the
> >>>>> engine from an AGM-86 looks like this:
> >>>>> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
> >>>>> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
> >>>>>
> >>>>> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Shill #2
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> No one ever made that claim in this thread.
> >>>
> >>>     Since #2 didn't claim anyone did, your comment makes no sense.
> >>>     What TRUTH are you trying to divert attention from?
> >>>
> >>>> And I think you should show us pictures of the 767 engines that you
> >>>> claim hit the pentagon.
> >>>
> >>>     Who claims it was a 767? In reality, please.
> >>>     Where are the pictures of the missile?
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> As for me answering any other questions,....It's going to cost you
> >>>> from now on, unless I choose to offer a freebie like this link
> >>>>
> >>>> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>     Starting at the 1:09 mark, you can see the AA flight 77! Sweet!
> >>>     So much for your LIE about a missile. The video YOU link to
> >>> PROVES your claim wrong.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Do you know how stupid you will look to anyone who watches the video
> >> at this point ?
> >
> > He won't look stupid at all, but you always do. it's the way you are.
> >
> >> And all they can see is a missile, too small to be a 767 plane
> >
> > No, that's not what you see.
> >
> >>
> >> Once again you are showing the fallacies of the 9/11 fairytale, and the
> >> level of desperation some people will go to not to have to admit that
> >> their own government covered the true facts up.
> >
> > It's just showing the madness, stupidity and gullibility of the Troofer.
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks for the help.
> >
> > It's our duty, and it's fun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aren't you just so clever to have to quote mine and  change around the 
> wording of  my and others posts to  suit your agenda.


I don't have an agenda, unlike you. The truth is the truth, and it has 
little to do with Troofery.

> The 9/11 official fairytale committee must really be proud of you.

I doubt they know I exist.

> Not to mention how impressed many people reading this will be that you find 
> 9/11 so much fun.

I don't find 911 fun at all, I find your insane claims about it a comedy 
gold mine.

> 
> You keep proving that only deception and obfuscation, and outright insults 
> of good little citizens like you,  is what allowed 9/11 to take place to 
> begin with.

Oh really? Tell me all about it. I know it will be crazy good. What 
could I have done to prevent it? Beam onto one of the planes? 

> 
> 
> BUT,....I'm still posting, and others will keep reading the truth.

I want you to keep posting your crazy BS. It shows people how far gone 
you can be and still run loose. The mystery is how you can post the shit 
you do and keep a straight face. But you're insane, so anything goes.


> And you help keep 9/11 front and center by making sure posts grow into 
> threads that  cover pages and last for weeks.

Glad to do it. Any attention I can give to Troofery is great.

> 
> The more attention you give me,....the more people are noticing, and 
> starting to do their own research.

More and more people are just laughing at you Troofers.



-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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

#521615 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:20:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

[...]

>>> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you know how stupid you will look to anyone who watches the video
>>> at this point ?
>>
>> He won't look stupid at all, but you always do. it's the way you are.
>>
>>> And all they can see is a missile, too small to be a 767 plane
>>
>> No, that's not what you see.
>>
>>>
>>> Once again you are showing the fallacies of the 9/11 fairytale, and the
>>> level of desperation some people will go to not to have to admit that
>>> their own government covered the true facts up.
>>
>> It's just showing the madness, stupidity and gullibility of the Troofer.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the help.
>>
>> It's our duty, and it's fun.
>
>
>
>Aren't you just so clever to have to quote mine and  change around the 
>wording of  my and others posts to  suit your agenda.

     No one has done any such thing.

>The 9/11 official fairytale committee must really be proud of you.

     No such committee exists.

>Not to mention how impressed many people reading this will be that you find 
>9/11 so much fun.

     Mocking your delusions doesn't mean BDK finds 9/11 fun.

>
>You keep proving that only deception and obfuscation, and outright insults 
>of good little citizens like you,  is what allowed 9/11 to take place to 
>begin with.

     Terrorists is what allowed 9/11 to take place.

>
>
>BUT,....I'm still posting, and others will keep reading the truth.

     You are still posting. And when people see the replies to your
posts, they are reading the truth.

>And you help keep 9/11 front and center by making sure posts grow into 
>threads that  cover pages and last for weeks.
>

     And you still claim to be mentally sound, even when you show you
KNOW you are not.

>The more attention you give me,....the more people are noticing, and 
>starting to do their own research.

     And when they do, they come to the realization that you're either
mentally ill, or lying. Possibly both.

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

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

#521614 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 06:02:34 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:18:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no
>>>>>> pictue of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said,
>>>>>> the logic is insane.
>>>>>
>>>>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the
>>>>> question of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never
>>>>> was a missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question
>>>>> frustrates them and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
>>>>
>>>> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed it
>>>> was a AGM-86 ALCM. Of course when it was pointed out that the engine
>>>> from an AGM-86 looks like this:
>>>> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
>>>>
>>>> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
>>>> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
>>>>
>>>> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
>>>>
>>>> Shill #2
>>>
>>>
>>> No one ever made that claim in this thread.
>>
>>     Since #2 didn't claim anyone did, your comment makes no sense.
>>     What TRUTH are you trying to divert attention from?
>>
>>> And I think you should show us pictures of the 767 engines that you
>>> claim hit the pentagon.
>>
>>     Who claims it was a 767? In reality, please.
>>     Where are the pictures of the missile?
>>
>>> As for me answering any other questions,....It's going to cost you
>>> from now on, unless I choose to offer a freebie like this link
>>>
>>> 9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg
>>
>>     Starting at the 1:09 mark, you can see the AA flight 77! Sweet!
>>     So much for your LIE about a missile. The video YOU link to
>> PROVES your claim wrong.
>
>
>
>
>9/11 : Pentagon Was Hit by a Cruise Missile - Proof!
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypc4ieJO0pg

     Neat! It's flight 77 again.
     Why do you continue to post that which you KNOW proves your
claims wrong? I honestly don't understand your motivation.

>
>Do you know how stupid you will look to anyone who watches the video at this 
>point ?

     I'd say, "Not even a little bit."

>And all they can see is a missile, too small to be a 767 plane
>

     I see a plane consistent with flight 77. No one who watches will
see a missile, since there is no missile to see.

>Once again you are showing the fallacies of the 9/11 fairytale, and the 
>level of desperation some people will go to not to have to admit that their 
>own government covered the true facts up.
>

     No such ting has occurred. 

>Thanks for the help.
>

     I'm more than pleased to further expose the Troofer k00ks'
claims. 

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

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

#521409 — Re: 9/11 was an inside job

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 22:18:03 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>
>
>Government Shill #2 wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:32:49 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:25:15 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>>>>>>>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>>>>>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jim,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to
>>>>>>>>> have your expertise in these discussions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Sarah Ehrett
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the
>>>>>>>> lines of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane
>>>>>>>> uncontrolable" was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure
>>>>>
>>>>> Missile type and platform?
>>>>>
>>>>> Still waiting for your answer.
>>>>
>>>> You will never get such an answer from any 9/11 lunatic, at least not
>>>> one that makes the slightes sense.
>>>>
>>>> You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no pictue
>>>> of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile.
>>>>
>>>> Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said,
>>>> the logic is insane.
>>>
>>> I enjoy spinning up the 9/11 lunatics.  They can't answer the question
>>> of  'what missile and what platform'  because there never was a
>>> missile.  Hammering them repeatedly with the question frustrates them
>>> and at the same time  exposes their kook logic.
>>
>> One of them, I think it was slowjoe (a Rockhead sycophant), claimed it
>> was a AGM-86 ALCM. 

HAHAHA!    I was thinking that was going to be their answer.    

>Of course when it was pointed out that the engine
>> from an AGM-86 looks like this:
>> http://s462.photobucket.com/user/govshill/media/F107_3.jpg.html
>>
>> and not like the part they like to claim is a missile engine part:
>> http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Pentagon_engine_photo350.jpg
>>
>> the various kOOks ran away. This is why you won't get an answer.
>>
>> Shill #2

Good show.   Thanks for the info as I'd missed it.  

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

#521413 — Re: Bast is also crazy

On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:25:15 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

>In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>>>>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
>>>>>> your expertise in these discussions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Sarah Ehrett
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
>>>>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
>>>>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>>>>
>>>> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
>>>
>>>I'm not sure 
>> 
>> Missile type and platform?    
>> 
>> Still waiting for your answer. 
>
>You will never get such an answer from any 9/11 lunatic, at least not
>one that makes the slightes sense.
>
>You can't argue with the insane logic that says if there is no pictue
>of the airplane, than it MUST have been a missile. 
> 
>Of course there is no picture of a missile either, but like I said, the
>logic is insane.
> 

     Well then, it couldn't have been a missile. Using Roger/Bast
logic, the lack of a picture of a missile it PROOF that there was no
missile.

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

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

#521395 — Re: Bast is also crazy

In article <2tbhva59qlt9bakfgacnmeueorujnn64ir@4ax.com>, 
ninety7gt@cox.net says...
> 
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
> >>>>> crazy as Rocky.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
> >>>>> anything.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jim,
> >>>>
> >>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
> >>>> your expertise in these discussions.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Sarah Ehrett
> >>>
> >>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
> >>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
> >>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
> >>
> >> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
> >
> >I'm not sure 
> 
> Missile type and platform?    
> 
> Still waiting for your answer. 

It was a Mark VI photon torpedo. Fired by the cloaked Enterprise in 
orbit. Makes as much sense as anything the Troofer's claim happened.

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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

#521412 — Re: Bast is also crazy

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:52:49 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
wrote:

>In article <2tbhva59qlt9bakfgacnmeueorujnn64ir@4ax.com>, 
>ninety7gt@cox.net says...
>> 
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> >Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>> >>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>> >>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>> >>>>> anything.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Jim,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
>> >>>> your expertise in these discussions.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>>> Sarah Ehrett
>> >>>
>> >>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
>> >>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
>> >>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>> >>
>> >> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
>> >
>> >I'm not sure 
>> 
>> Missile type and platform?    
>> 
>> Still waiting for your answer. 
>
>It was a Mark VI photon torpedo. Fired by the cloaked Enterprise in 
>orbit. Makes as much sense as anything the Troofer's claim happened.

More sense if you ask me.  I don't think Gene Roddenberry was
criminally insane.  I'm certain Best and Roger both *are*.  

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

#521423 — Re: Bast is also crazy

In article <2omhvapkubj35a9u1v45r2gv9tk4v6fujn@4ax.com>, 
ninety7gt@cox.net says...
> 
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:52:49 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <2tbhva59qlt9bakfgacnmeueorujnn64ir@4ax.com>, 
> >ninety7gt@cox.net says...
> >> 
> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
> >> >>>>> crazy as Rocky.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
> >> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
> >> >>>>> anything.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Jim,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
> >> >>>> your expertise in these discussions.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Cheers,
> >> >>>> Sarah Ehrett
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
> >> >>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
> >> >>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
> >> >
> >> >I'm not sure 
> >> 
> >> Missile type and platform?    
> >> 
> >> Still waiting for your answer. 
> >
> >It was a Mark VI photon torpedo. Fired by the cloaked Enterprise in 
> >orbit. Makes as much sense as anything the Troofer's claim happened.
> 
> More sense if you ask me.  I don't think Gene Roddenberry was
> criminally insane.  I'm certain Best and Roger both *are*.  

I think Roger is just a troll, but Bast is really batshit insane.

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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

#521414 — Re: Bast is also crazy

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:52:49 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
wrote:

>In article <2tbhva59qlt9bakfgacnmeueorujnn64ir@4ax.com>, 
>ninety7gt@cox.net says...
>> 
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> >Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>> >>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>> >>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>> >>>>> anything.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Jim,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
>> >>>> your expertise in these discussions.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>>> Sarah Ehrett
>> >>>
>> >>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
>> >>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
>> >>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>> >>
>> >> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
>> >
>> >I'm not sure 
>> 
>> Missile type and platform?    
>> 
>> Still waiting for your answer. 
>
>It was a Mark VI photon torpedo. Fired by the cloaked Enterprise in 
>orbit. Makes as much sense as anything the Troofer's claim happened.

     But cloaked ships can't fire weapons. Although, in "The
Undiscovered Country" a Klingon ship could.
     Hmmmmm.... You may be on to something. At least you are if we
apply k00k logic.

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

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

#521424 — Re: Bast is also crazy

In article <hrmhva1gjm7jk585juakaeni3oh03mnm8f@4ax.com>, 
compuelf@gmail.com says...
> 
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:52:49 -0400, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <2tbhva59qlt9bakfgacnmeueorujnn64ir@4ax.com>, 
> >ninety7gt@cox.net says...
> >> 
> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
> >> >>>>> crazy as Rocky.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
> >> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
> >> >>>>> anything.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Jim,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
> >> >>>> your expertise in these discussions.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Cheers,
> >> >>>> Sarah Ehrett
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
> >> >>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
> >> >>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
> >> >
> >> >I'm not sure 
> >> 
> >> Missile type and platform?    
> >> 
> >> Still waiting for your answer. 
> >
> >It was a Mark VI photon torpedo. Fired by the cloaked Enterprise in 
> >orbit. Makes as much sense as anything the Troofer's claim happened.
> 
>      But cloaked ships can't fire weapons. Although, in "The
> Undiscovered Country" a Klingon ship could.
>      Hmmmmm.... You may be on to something. At least you are if we
> apply k00k logic.

Oh yeah, and the lack of denial from Star Fleet is proof enough for Bast 
and the other 911 dimwits.

-- 
BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of 
Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies.
Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former 
Black Helicopter color consultant.

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

#521398 — Re: Bast is also crazy

Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:47:58 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>>>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to
>>>>> have your expertise in these discussions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Sarah Ehrett
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
>>>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
>>>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>>>
>>> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
>>
>> I'm not sure
>
> Missile type and platform?
>
> Still waiting for your answer.





Answers were free, but they now cost you $1000 each.
...In adavance. 

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

#521391 — Re: Bast is also crazy

In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> 
> 
> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:57:30 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>>> In sci.physics Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 20:21:16 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, just yet another person who thinks you're just as bat shit
>>>>> crazy as Rocky.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Watch the video or shut up
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>>>>>
>>>>> A video that starts off with obvious lies is hardly proof of
>>>>> anything.
>>>>
>>>> Jim,
>>>>
>>>> Did I read where you said you were a pilot?  If so, it's good to have
>>>> your expertise in these discussions.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Sarah Ehrett
>>>
>>> Yeah, I don't usually tell people that but a response along the lines
>>> of "ask a pilot how ground effect makes an airplane uncontrolable"
>>> was just so stupid I couldn't help myself.
>>
>> Well then we'll just keep that info between us.   :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure which of your schizophrenic personalities is funnier.
> The one that makes paper planes and claims to be a pilot,.....or the one 
> who's impressed by it.
> <ROTFLMOFAO>
> 
> 
> Hey, just or fun why don't you go to
> Pilots for 9/11 Truth,
> and tell them what kooks they are.
> 
> http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

Yes, that site is good for a laugh and makes one wonder how many
pilots are associated with the site.

One of the more amusing items is how they go on about barometric 
altitude data when it is the radio altitude from the radar altimeter
that is the gold standard and was shown to be correct plus or minus
a couple of feet.

 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#521350 — Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes:

>> Missile type and platform?

>Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?

Why don't you simply answer Sarah's question?  Is that too hard?

>Watch the video or shut up

That video doesn't answer Sarah's question.

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

#521411 — Re: Rocky's lateset delusional rave

On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 16:02:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:55:35 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:03:04 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> I've seen videos of people trying to debunk September Clues but the
>>>>>>> problem is they can't debunk everything and oddly enough I've seen
>>>>>>> evidence myself of helicopters that recorded video what were not
>>>>>>> recorded by other helicopters so why were we given a fake
>>>>>>> background?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalzed is a sign of mental
>>>>>> illness, kook.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whatever are you babbling about with your helicopter video ravings,
>>>>>> kook?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why can't you tell us the missile type and platform that your
>>>>>> delusions tell you hit the Pentagon, kook?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The questions you pose are irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>> No there not when your claim is a missile struck the Pentagon.
>>>>
>>>>> As we know you  can't justify how a passenger jet that is over 100'
>>>>> wide and 40' high  can elude any photographs, and fit through a 16'
>>>>> hole.
>>>>
>>>> Your 16 ' hole  defense means you think only a missile could fit in
>>>> that space?
>>>>
>>>> What kind of missile and platform?
>>
>>> That all three of your puppet ID's pulled out the same link that I
>>> posted is laughable.  Are you THAT afraid of  my proof ???
>>
>> The question you keep avoiding is missile type and platform?
>>
>> What is your answer?
>>
>>> I'll add it back in  below, and you can now explain to everyone why you
>>> would feel you have to edit out my post.
>>
>> Your link doesn't address missile type and platform.  I've watched it.
>>
>> Why don't YOU look at it again and tell me what is the missile type
>> and platform?
>>
>>> RARE Footage Pentagon 9 11 Surveillance Camera Video Impact Crash 9-11
>>> / LIVE LEAK
>>>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk
>>
>> Did you look at it again?  Now you answer the question;
>>
>> Missile type and platform?
>
>
>
>Who are you to demand anything of me ? My Mother ?
>
>Watch the video or shut up
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNngyhZQrk

     Your default admission that you will only lie is noted and
accepted. Since you keep offering a video you KNOW is lying, it's
clear you are admitting you will offer only lies.

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

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

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

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web