Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #522738 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-22 17:45 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-09-27 11:38 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 157 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-22 17:45 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Rocky@Lying.Squirrel.com - 2015-09-22 20:24 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-22 23:10 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 07:47 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:46 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 00:54 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-23 12:52 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 14:13 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 13:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 15:18 -0400
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> Admits he posts lies and False Videos. Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 18:11 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-23 15:55 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 17:09 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:34 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-23 21:31 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-23 22:51 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-24 09:38 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-24 09:13 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 04:19 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-25 17:09 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 04:40 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 10:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-24 18:16 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-24 17:16 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-24 20:07 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-25 05:39 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-25 08:13 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-25 15:35 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-25 16:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 17:06 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-26 05:52 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-26 17:01 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 20:25 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 17:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-26 11:16 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 20:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-26 21:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 05:32 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 06:03 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 09:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 05:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-25 14:44 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-25 13:42 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-26 05:49 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-26 11:32 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 20:25 -0500
things that **** y'go noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 16:24 -0700
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-25 10:12 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-26 11:23 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-26 13:55 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-26 18:55 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-26 23:22 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-26 20:52 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 20:26 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 13:50 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:57 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-27 01:38 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 05:57 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 09:01 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-27 17:53 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 10:36 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-27 17:15 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-27 23:57 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 19:27 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-28 01:55 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 22:29 -0500
why not ask wTf not noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 12:41 -0700
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 03:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-28 16:20 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-28 12:13 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-28 19:58 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 06:30 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-28 17:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-28 22:15 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-28 17:33 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-28 19:12 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-29 04:52 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 11:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 15:18 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 15:51 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-01 15:26 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-01 15:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-02 17:48 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-03 15:06 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-04 20:00 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-04 17:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-10-04 23:02 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 04:07 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 03:40 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 10:51 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-05 16:19 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 11:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-05 18:08 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 12:16 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-10-05 15:20 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-10-07 09:57 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-10-04 17:25 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-27 07:43 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 08:58 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-27 10:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 13:31 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-27 18:42 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 03:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 18:03 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 21:21 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-28 13:32 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-28 14:52 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-28 22:20 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-28 17:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-28 17:54 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 03:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 09:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 13:32 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-27 17:57 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-26 20:51 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-27 07:54 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 08:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-27 09:57 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 13:35 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-27 10:12 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 13:40 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 10:51 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 13:48 -0400
Re: Rocky's latest obsession jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-27 18:03 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:57 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 17:56 -0700
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 20:26 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-27 09:49 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-27 14:13 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 10:26 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-27 17:17 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-28 19:58 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 06:30 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-28 13:37 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-28 09:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-29 12:55 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-28 17:44 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-29 12:55 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-29 17:01 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-29 15:25 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 04:22 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 20:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-27 08:05 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 09:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-27 13:49 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-27 18:17 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-27 09:58 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-27 21:07 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-27 09:48 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-27 12:03 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 03:46 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 11:38 -0500
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-26 04:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kvpc0btleiko0qknio98knm9210gauhg53@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523189 |
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:09:30 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:5b4a0bpgpof7tok217ipq5sil2m4lppjje@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:13:19 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> You don't have to go with pre-conceived ideas to understand what
>>>> happened on 911.
>>>
>>>ROTFLMAO because that comes from someone who never figured out what
>>>happened
>>>on 9/11/01.
>>
>> But BDK has proved, more than once, that he has figured it out.
>> What does this lie of yours gain you?
>
>
>BKD has never been able to provide a valid argument for any of his bullshit
>and you would know that if you just looked.
>
I have looked.
Are you going to answer the question I asked, or continue to
PROVE you are psychologically incapable of answering? Time will tell.
>If you think otherwise post a link to a post where BKD uses a valid argument
>or link with the message ID posted like the following message ID:
> news:5b4a0bpgpof7tok217ipq5sil2m4lppjje@4ax.com...
>
Broken link.
Why are you so resistant to posting MIDs in the proper format?
What do you FEAR about posting them properly?
>And with the remark above there is one thing you are consistent with and
>that is filling this NG with complete bullshit. But you have to fill this
>NG with lies to support 9/11 the great lie.
>
Whereas I have offered no lies, a truth you've helped to prove
many times, your lie has failed.
Would you care to try another lie?
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-24 10:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mu12s8$u2r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522963 |
BDK wrote: > In article <mtvoc8$ie5$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says... >> >> BDK wrote: >>> In article <mtvcq6$n75$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid >>> says... >>>> >>>> Rocky wrote: >>>>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message >>>>> news:mtuvvs$3mg$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rocky wrote: >>>>>>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:mtul9i$kut$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:45:28 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no >>>>>>>>>> audio >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Published on Feb 17, 2013 >>>>>>>>>> Video says all. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVIEuGWMFDo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So what does it say? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Posting youtube videos will no longer be watched. Give your own >>>>>>>>> comments. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Refusing to watch videos is proof that you have made up your mind >>>>>>>> and have no desire to be confused by actual facts. >>>>>>>> And since you won't believe a video, you won't believe anything >>>>>>>> typed on a page either. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for saving our time replying to your posts >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I tried to warn you about Sarah. BTW I can't believe Kid Wills >>>>>>> still falls for her shit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Me, I couldn't believe the above video. I mean it was like >>>>>>> whoever posted the video above was right there with Evan Farbanks >>>>>>> or maybe Evan Fairbanks finally fessed up to the facts. Either >>>>>>> way is possible. Rocky >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I actually couldn't care less about this sarah person. >>>>>> And they are hardly a threat to anyone, anymore than the rest of >>>>>> the tens of usenet 9/11 debunking troublemakers who post daily. >>>>>> They implicitly trust that their government will always look after >>>>>> thier interests first. >>>>>> And I would ask them ,,...well how's that obamacare working out for >>>>>> ya ??? I'll keep posting video links and if she doesn't get that >>>>>> the message for all of them is ,...." 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB " >>>>>> She smply doesn't have to watch them or even click on my links. >>>>>> They are all now identified in the subject line and just before the >>>>>> video. >>>>> >>>>> BTW do you remember your video with Judy Woods where she is talking >>>>> about the strange seismic readings at GZ? I'd like to make sure >>>>> that Michael from alt.physics sees that one. >>>>> >>>>> TIA >>>>> Rocky >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> i'm not sure what video you are referring to ,but a quick search on >>>> youtube brings up pages of her videos. >>>> >>>> This should be a good one for you, as it has much of her speech. >>>> And goes into why the towers dustified >>> >>> "dustified"? Wow, you're even making up words/terms! >>> >>> BTW, you would (If you were sane)expect a building with a lot of >>> drywall in it to produce a lot of dust when it collapses. >>> >>> Since you aren't sane, it "Dustifies". >>> >>> WOW. >>> >>>> >>>> Dr Judy Wood : Evidence of breakthrough energy technology on 9/11 >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vadSaWyiozg >>> >>> BWHAHAHAHA! Judy Wood? Wow, only the dopiest of Troofers swallow her >>> nonsense. Congrats! You've made the kOOktards of kOOktards list. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I was asked about her, so I provided a link. >> I never claimed I think she is my "leader", but she does make a very >> good point that people must look at what occurred on 9/11, and not go >> in with pre-conceived ideas about what caused things to happen. > > You don't have to go with pre-conceived ideas to understand what > happened on 911. > >> No planes were ever proven either. Unless you want to accept talking >> heads on TV telling you what to believe. > > Thousands of people saw the first plane hit, and many more thousands saw > the second one. What else would people walking and driving in the NYC > area be looking at? A handful of people claim it was small planes, or > there were no windows, etc, but the vast majority saw the jets hit. I > know someone who saw the jetliner hit the Pentagon. Not to see it personally. The only people in Manhattan that actually saw anything other than an explosion, admit they saw planes on TV. You refer to an Urban Legend, that repeated over and over by the media you now believe is true. As for the pentagon,....I don;t care what kind of drugs you friends take or what they see when they do. It was never captured on any video, and NOBODY saw a plane or debris from a plane at the pentagon,....not even reporters on the scene. Only some staged pictures were released to the media the next day. That consisted of a tiny fraction of what would be left after a crash. (but could have easily been flown in and dropped from a helicopter overnight when no one was watching)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-24 18:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mu1emj$hje$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #522969 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >> Thousands of people saw the first plane hit, and many more thousands saw >> the second one. What else would people walking and driving in the NYC >> area be looking at? A handful of people claim it was small planes, or >> there were no windows, etc, but the vast majority saw the jets hit. I >> know someone who saw the jetliner hit the Pentagon. >Not to see it personally. >The only people in Manhattan that actually saw anything other than an >explosion, admit they saw planes on TV. >You refer to an Urban Legend, that repeated over and over by the media you >now believe is true. Now, that's beyond kooktarded. There are thousands and thousands of people on the streets of Manhattan every day. Most would have looked up when they heard a jet flying low and loud, like the firefighters in the Naudet video. A big percentage of New Yorkers were already staring at the Twin Towers when the second plane hit. On second rereading, maybe what Bast wrote is technically and devilishly true. Just about every single person who saw either jet in person did see them on TV, either that evening or over the next several days. The TV replayed the events over and over and over again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-24 17:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <odCdnU4-Ypzv65nLnZ2dnUU7-Y_OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522981 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mu1emj$hje$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: > >>> Thousands of people saw the first plane hit, and many more thousands saw >>> the second one. What else would people walking and driving in the NYC >>> area be looking at? A handful of people claim it was small planes, or >>> there were no windows, etc, but the vast majority saw the jets hit. I >>> know someone who saw the jetliner hit the Pentagon. > >>Not to see it personally. >>The only people in Manhattan that actually saw anything other than an >>explosion, admit they saw planes on TV. >>You refer to an Urban Legend, that repeated over and over by the media you >>now believe is true. > > Now, that's beyond kooktarded. There are thousands and thousands of > people on the streets of Manhattan every day. Most would have looked up > when they heard a jet flying low and loud, like the firefighters in the > Naudet video. A big percentage of New Yorkers were already staring at the > Twin Towers when the second plane hit. riiight. Don't forget Newton. For every action there is an opposite action. At the very very least those CGIs should have lost some speed or parts but they went straight into the Twin Towers just like a CGI would. 07 - The Key https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rml2TL5N8ds And also both ABC and FOX were both talking to eye witnesses when the explosion went off in the South Tower that did not see or hear a plane. > On second rereading, maybe what Bast wrote is technically and devilishly > true. Just about every single person who saw either jet in person did see > them on TV, either that evening or over the next several days. The TV > replayed the events over and over and over again. And in the process they slowly weeded out the videos where the wing of the CGI disappears but you still have one of them. <G> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-24 20:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mu233p$uem$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #523034 |
Rocky wrote: > "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message > news:mu1emj$hje$1@pcls7.std.com... >> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >> >>>> Thousands of people saw the first plane hit, and many more thousands >>>> saw the second one. What else would people walking and driving in >>>> the NYC area be looking at? A handful of people claim it was small >>>> planes, or there were no windows, etc, but the vast majority saw the >>>> jets hit. I know someone who saw the jetliner hit the Pentagon. >> >>> Not to see it personally. >>> The only people in Manhattan that actually saw anything other than an >>> explosion, admit they saw planes on TV. >>> You refer to an Urban Legend, that repeated over and over by the >>> media you now believe is true. >> >> Now, that's beyond kooktarded. There are thousands and thousands of >> people on the streets of Manhattan every day. Most would have looked >> up when they heard a jet flying low and loud, like the firefighters in >> the Naudet video. A big percentage of New Yorkers were already staring >> at the Twin Towers when the second plane hit. > > riiight. Don't forget Newton. For every action there is an opposite > action. At the very very least those CGIs should have lost some speed > or parts but they went straight into the Twin Towers just like a CGI > would. > 07 - The Key > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rml2TL5N8ds > > And also both ABC and FOX were both talking to eye witnesses when the > explosion went off in the South Tower that did not see or hear a plane. > > > >> On second rereading, maybe what Bast wrote is technically and >> devilishly true. Just about every single person who saw either jet in >> person did see them on TV, either that evening or over the next >> several days. The TV replayed the events over and over and over again. > > And in the process they slowly weeded out the videos where the wing of > the CGI disappears but you still have one of them. <G> > > Rocky Actually,.....NO airliner videos were aired by any media after the 11th. By the next morning you heard the talking heads telling you about airliners,... but never saw more than a few still photos They probably realized that if they continued to air them, people would notice the flaws. (they forgot how many people had DVR's, archiving everything) And then the new "private" videos were only released over the web, or showed up in documentary's.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-25 05:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mu2mn7$7fc$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #523046 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >Actually,.....NO airliner videos were aired by any media after the 11th. >By the next morning you heard the talking heads telling you about >airliners,... but never saw more than a few still photos >They probably realized that if they continued to air them, people would >notice the flaws. >(they forgot how many people had DVR's, archiving everything) That's bullshit. I remember it well. They played UA 175 striking the South Tower over and over again. Different angles and all. Over and over again. The burning towers from all angles. The towers collapsing over and over and over again as well. For days. >And then the new "private" videos were only released over the web, or showed >up in documentary's. Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did have over and over.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-25 08:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3vCdnRB0a6lQ2pjLnZ2dnUU7-bWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #523078 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mu2mn7$7fc$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: > >>Actually,.....NO airliner videos were aired by any media after the 11th. >>By the next morning you heard the talking heads telling you about >>airliners,... but never saw more than a few still photos >>They probably realized that if they continued to air them, people would >>notice the flaws. >>(they forgot how many people had DVR's, archiving everything) > > That's bullshit. I remember it well. They played UA 175 striking the > South Tower over and over again. Different angles and all. Over and > over again. The burning towers from all angles. The towers collapsing > over and over and over again as well. For days. ROTFLMAO because you mean you saw UCGI 175 morphing into the South Tower with just smoke and mirrors minus the mirrors. <G> Michael, you were ripped off. As much as you would like to believe there was a real crash a real crash would have shed some parts. Oh and talking about crashes that didn't shed any parts neither did the crash at Pranksville, PA or the Pentagon. >>And then the new "private" videos were only released over the web, or >>showed >>up in documentary's. > > Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet > video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that doesn't > take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did have over > and over. And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175 had disappearing wings. There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-25 15:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mu47hf$uc3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #523097 |
Rocky wrote: > "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message > news:mu2mn7$7fc$1@pcls7.std.com... >> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >> >>> Actually,.....NO airliner videos were aired by any media after the >>> 11th. By the next morning you heard the talking heads telling you about >>> airliners,... but never saw more than a few still photos >>> They probably realized that if they continued to air them, people >>> would notice the flaws. >>> (they forgot how many people had DVR's, archiving everything) >> >> That's bullshit. I remember it well. They played UA 175 striking the >> South Tower over and over again. Different angles and all. Over and >> over again. The burning towers from all angles. The towers collapsing >> over and over and over again as well. For days. > > ROTFLMAO because you mean you saw UCGI 175 morphing into the South Tower > with just smoke and mirrors minus the mirrors. <G> > > Michael, you were ripped off. As much as you would like to believe > there was a real crash a real crash would have shed some parts. Oh and > talking about crashes that didn't shed any parts neither did the crash > at Pranksville, PA or the Pentagon. > >>> And then the new "private" videos were only released over the web, or >>> showed >>> up in documentary's. >> >> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet >> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that >> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did >> have over and over. > > And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175 > had disappearing wings. > > There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry > about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the > "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies. > > Rocky I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is having problems. But I'm a bit amused that anyone is so adamant they saw the videos,.....when the networks all pulled them. MAYBE these people watch the same channel that Bush gets, that he stated more than once about seeing the first alleged "crash" on TV that morning, at the school before he went into the classroom, ....when none of the stations had covered it. ....Although Bush was reading from his prepared script so maybe somebody just goofed and didn't have the CGI viideo to hand out to the stations that morning, and Bush wasn't told there was a delay.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-25 16:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <0tidndBpoNhbX5jLnZ2dnUU7-UGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #523142 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:mu47hf$uc3$1@dont-email.me... > > > Rocky wrote: >> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >> news:mu2mn7$7fc$1@pcls7.std.com... >>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >>> >>>> Actually,.....NO airliner videos were aired by any media after the >>>> 11th. By the next morning you heard the talking heads telling you about >>>> airliners,... but never saw more than a few still photos >>>> They probably realized that if they continued to air them, people >>>> would notice the flaws. >>>> (they forgot how many people had DVR's, archiving everything) >>> >>> That's bullshit. I remember it well. They played UA 175 striking the >>> South Tower over and over again. Different angles and all. Over and >>> over again. The burning towers from all angles. The towers collapsing >>> over and over and over again as well. For days. >> >> ROTFLMAO because you mean you saw UCGI 175 morphing into the South Tower >> with just smoke and mirrors minus the mirrors. <G> >> >> Michael, you were ripped off. As much as you would like to believe >> there was a real crash a real crash would have shed some parts. Oh and >> talking about crashes that didn't shed any parts neither did the crash >> at Pranksville, PA or the Pentagon. >> >>>> And then the new "private" videos were only released over the web, or >>>> showed >>>> up in documentary's. >>> >>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet >>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that >>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did >>> have over and over. >> >> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175 >> had disappearing wings. >> >> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry >> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the >> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies. >> >> Rocky > > > > > I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is having > problems. Michael always removes alt.astronomy from his replies and I always put it back in. > But I'm a bit amused that anyone is so adamant they saw the > videos,.....when the networks all pulled them. I don't know what they do because I never bother to watch what I know of as complete BS but I wonder if people in or near Nuke York City are given a differeent video since most of them know there were no jets especially if they watched the video from Chopper 4 that never added the cheap CGI of Flight 175 to their live video. > MAYBE these people watch the same channel that Bush gets, that he stated > more than once about seeing the first alleged "crash" on TV that morning, > at the school before he went into the classroom, > ....when none of the stations had covered it. According to the book by Susan Lindauer there were quite a few people that saw what I call "9/11 the Great Hijacker Hoax" from the very start. But they were in a different country. https://extremeprejudiceusa.wordpress.com/ > ....Although Bush was reading from his prepared script so maybe somebody > just goofed and didn't have the CGI viideo to hand out to the stations > that morning, and Bush wasn't told there was a delay. No, he might have seen it if he was getting the same video feed that some people were. Besides, since the real 9/11 Hijacker Hoax took years of planning there would certainly be people trying to document it from the very start. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-25 17:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <r9hb0b54nion2o4rqi80tfqr86r3s31pik@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523181 |
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 16:54:23 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is having
>> problems.
>
>Michael always removes alt.astronomy from his replies and I always put it
>back in.
>
Because you have a very unhealthy OBSESSION with the group. You
should speak to a mental health care professional, and soon.
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-26 05:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mu5bq3$8rk$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #523181 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message >news:mu47hf$uc3$1@dont-email.me... >> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is having >> problems. >Michael always removes alt.astronomy from his replies and I always put it >back in. I'm just sparing an unrelated group the effects of your mental illness.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-26 17:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <rsqdnTD5XJ2ci5rLnZ2dnUU7-Q-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #523237 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mu5bq3$8rk$2@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message >>news:mu47hf$uc3$1@dont-email.me... > >>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is >>> having >>> problems. > >>Michael always removes alt.astronomy from his replies and I always put it >>back in. > > I'm just sparing an unrelated group the effects of your mental illness. Your the one that missed a lot of inconsistencies with the Pentagon, Pranksville, PA and Nuke York City and not me. I certainly saw the inconsistencies with Pranksville, PA and the Pentagon but it took me 9 more years to figure out what happened in Nuke York City or should I say what didn't happen in Nuke York City? Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-26 20:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bche0b9gm37af47hrv0pmp8er8p0pufa7h@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523312 |
On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 17:01:44 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>news:mu5bq3$8rk$2@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>>>news:mu47hf$uc3$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is
>>>> having
>>>> problems.
>>
>>>Michael always removes alt.astronomy from his replies and I always put it
>>>back in.
>>
>> I'm just sparing an unrelated group the effects of your mental illness.
>
>Your the one that missed a lot of inconsistencies with the Pentagon,
>Pranksville, PA and Nuke York City and not me.
>
Liar.
>I certainly saw the inconsistencies with Pranksville, PA and the Pentagon
>but it took me 9 more years to figure out what happened in Nuke York City or
>should I say what didn't happen in Nuke York City?
There were and are no inconsistencies. Not in reality.
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-25 17:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <h9hb0b5eci2o5ba5d2shunkadmet28q77a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523142 |
On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:35:00 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
[...]
>>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet
>>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that
>>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did
>>> have over and over.
>>
>> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175
>> had disappearing wings.
>>
>> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry
>> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the
>> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies.
>>
>> Rocky
>
>
>
>
>I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is having
>problems.
Or, as is far more plausible, your news reader can't follow a
thread.
You're using Outlook Express. That explains a great deal.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-26 11:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mu6cob$rh6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #523187 |
K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: > On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:35:00 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > > [...] > >>>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet >>>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that >>>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did >>>> have over and over. >>> >>> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175 >>> had disappearing wings. >>> >>> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry >>> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the >>> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies. >>> >>> Rocky >> >> >> >> >> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is >> having problems. > > Or, as is far more plausible, your news reader can't follow a > thread. > You're using Outlook Express. That explains a great deal. Well, It seems it's not broken enough, as I can still see YOUR post. But since I have your attention, have you heard ?,.....9/11 was an inside job !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-26 20:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <97he0b9q1a295b8rhf0jlt3mem71ul3cr1@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523263 |
On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:16:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:35:00 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet
>>>>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that
>>>>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did
>>>>> have over and over.
>>>>
>>>> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175
>>>> had disappearing wings.
>>>>
>>>> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry
>>>> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the
>>>> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is
>>> having problems.
>>
>> Or, as is far more plausible, your news reader can't follow a
>> thread.
>> You're using Outlook Express. That explains a great deal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Well, It seems it's not broken enough, as I can still see YOUR post.
>
Because I let you. But you won't see this one, unless someone
quotes it.
>But since I have your attention, have you heard ?,.....9/11 was an inside
>job !
That's one of MANY lies I've heard in my life.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-26 21:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ueWdnUmkB6i80prLnZ2dnUU7-KGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #523357 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:97he0b9q1a295b8rhf0jlt3mem71ul3cr1@4ax.com... > On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:16:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:35:00 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>>>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet >>>>>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that >>>>>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did >>>>>> have over and over. >>>>> >>>>> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175 >>>>> had disappearing wings. >>>>> >>>>> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry >>>>> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the >>>>> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is >>>> having problems. >>> >>> Or, as is far more plausible, your news reader can't follow a >>> thread. >>> You're using Outlook Express. That explains a great deal. >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Well, It seems it's not broken enough, as I can still see YOUR post. >> > > Because I let you. But you won't see this one, unless someone > quotes it. > >>But since I have your attention, have you heard ?,.....9/11 was an inside >>job ! > > That's one of MANY lies I've heard in my life. It an educated observation after considering how many lies we were told about three spontaneous building implosions and jets with transparent wings that have the exact same characteristics as CGIs. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-27 05:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <qchf0b13fl5neah5sigs6l5gg8biroh5sq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523379 |
On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 21:05:28 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:97he0b9q1a295b8rhf0jlt3mem71ul3cr1@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:16:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:35:00 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>>>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the Naudet
>>>>>>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that
>>>>>>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they did
>>>>>>> have over and over.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI 175
>>>>>> had disappearing wings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to worry
>>>>>> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the
>>>>>> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is
>>>>> having problems.
>>>>
>>>> Or, as is far more plausible, your news reader can't follow a
>>>> thread.
>>>> You're using Outlook Express. That explains a great deal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Well, It seems it's not broken enough, as I can still see YOUR post.
>>
>> Because I let you. But you won't see this one, unless someone
>> quotes it.
>>
>>>But since I have your attention, have you heard ?,.....9/11 was an inside
>>>job !
>>
>> That's one of MANY lies I've heard in my life.
>
>It an educated observation after considering how many lies we were told
>about three spontaneous building implosions and jets with transparent wings
>that have the exact same characteristics as CGIs.
>
Since there were no CGIs, as you have helped to prove, none of
what you claim above is possible.
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-27 06:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <LsSdnUO6MoqhUJrLnZ2dnUU7-KednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #523401 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:qchf0b13fl5neah5sigs6l5gg8biroh5sq@4ax.com... > On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 21:05:28 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:97he0b9q1a295b8rhf0jlt3mem71ul3cr1@4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:16:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:35:00 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>>>>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the >>>>>>>> Naudet >>>>>>>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that >>>>>>>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they >>>>>>>> did >>>>>>>> have over and over. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI >>>>>>> 175 >>>>>>> had disappearing wings. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to >>>>>>> worry >>>>>>> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the >>>>>>> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is >>>>>> having problems. >>>>> >>>>> Or, as is far more plausible, your news reader can't follow a >>>>> thread. >>>>> You're using Outlook Express. That explains a great deal. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Well, It seems it's not broken enough, as I can still see YOUR post. >>> >>> Because I let you. But you won't see this one, unless someone >>> quotes it. >>> >>>>But since I have your attention, have you heard ?,.....9/11 was an >>>>inside >>>>job ! >>> >>> That's one of MANY lies I've heard in my life. >> >>It an educated observation after considering how many lies we were told >>about three spontaneous building implosions and jets with transparent >>wings >>that have the exact same characteristics as CGIs. >> > > Since there were no CGIs, as you have helped to prove, none of > what you claim above is possible. Boy are you fcuked up because if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. DUH Interesting, that now there are two posters who try to hide their post from Bast. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-27 09:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mltf0bpie426r5ej33elqo9j96g5vj4em0@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523406 |
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 06:03:34 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:qchf0b13fl5neah5sigs6l5gg8biroh5sq@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 21:05:28 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:97he0b9q1a295b8rhf0jlt3mem71ul3cr1@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:16:15 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:35:00 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Many videos didn't show up until much later (in particular the
>>>>>>>>> Naudet
>>>>>>>>> video of Flight 11, but also several videos of UA 175), but that
>>>>>>>>> doesn't take away from the fact they played the UA 175 clips they
>>>>>>>>> did have over and over.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And I'll bet you forgot to count how many of those videos of UCGI
>>>>>>>> 175 had disappearing wings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is one thing for sure. The 9/11 Hoaxsters didn't have to
>>>>>>>> worry
>>>>>>>> about how shitty their graphics were because people would eat up the
>>>>>>>> "Official 9/11 story story story" despite all it's inconsistencies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not getting a lot of posts apparently, I guess my newsserver is
>>>>>>> having problems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or, as is far more plausible, your news reader can't follow a
>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>> You're using Outlook Express. That explains a great deal.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, It seems it's not broken enough, as I can still see YOUR post.
>>>>
>>>> Because I let you. But you won't see this one, unless someone
>>>> quotes it.
>>>>
>>>>>But since I have your attention, have you heard ?,.....9/11 was an
>>>>>inside job !
>>>>
>>>> That's one of MANY lies I've heard in my life.
>>>
>>>It an educated observation after considering how many lies we were told
>>>about three spontaneous building implosions and jets with transparent
>>>wings that have the exact same characteristics as CGIs.
>>
>> Since there were no CGIs, as you have helped to prove, none of
>> what you claim above is possible.
>
>Boy are you fcuked up because if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck,
>and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. DUH
>
And that is why the mentally stable claim planes hit the towers,
the Pentagon and crashed in the field in Pennsylvania.
>Interesting, that now there are two posters who try to hide their post from
>Bast.
I've not seen anyone try to hide any posts from anyone. If
someone has a competent news reader, they will see my posts. Michael's
as well.
What do you hope to gain from this lie of yours? Serious question
(that you won't answer).
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web