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

Groups > sci.physics > #523523 > unrolled thread

Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-27 20:20 -0500
    Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-28 03:52 +0000
      Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-09-27 23:52 -0500
      Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-28 07:06 -0500
        Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 15:51 -0500
          Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-28 16:32 -0500
        Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-29 02:40 +0000
          Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-05 11:19 -0500
            Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-10-08 14:15 +0000
              Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-10-08 14:36 -0500
              Re: Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 20:20 -0500

#523523 — Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 9, 2014

Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 - September 
9, 2014
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTr5KwaC550

While I have not listened to all of the above yet Judy has acknowledged that 
the debris had to be very small to float up and she herself says up up and 
up.  In her book she just said it had to be a certain size debris but not 
what size.

Judy also points out that conventional explosives could not have converted 
the Twin Towers to very small particles but she still would not say nukes 
could do that.  <G>

So what do the Planted Evidence People like BKD or Kidd or Michael say about 
the size of the debris that floated away from GZ?

Rocky 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#523538

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>So what do the Planted Evidence People like BKD or Kidd or Michael say about 
>the size of the debris that floated away from GZ?

"Planted Evidence People"?

The very small amount of the towers that became smoke or dust particles
and floated away would have been very small particles, yes.  No secret
here. Smoke contains lots of very small particles, and drywall is very
dusty when crushed.

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

#523542

On 9/27/2015 10:52 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>> So what do the Planted Evidence People like BKD or Kidd or Michael say about
>> the size of the debris that floated away from GZ?
>
> "Planted Evidence People"?
>
> The very small amount of the towers that became smoke or dust particles
> and floated away would have been very small particles, yes.  No secret
> here. Smoke contains lots of very small particles, and drywall is very
> dusty when crushed.
>


A drywall panel consists of a layer of gypsum plaster sandwiched between 
two layers of paper.  The raw gypsum powder, CaSO4·2 H2O, is heated to 
drive off the water then slightly re-hydrated to produce the hemihydrate 
of calcium sulfate (CaSO4·½ H2O). The plaster is mixed with fiber 
(typically paper and/or fiberglass), plasticizer, foaming agent, finely 
ground gypsum crystal as an accelerator, EDTA, starch or other chelate 
as a retarder, various additives that may decrease mildew and increase 
fire resistance (fiberglass or vermiculite), wax emulsion or silanes for 
lower water absorption. The board is then formed by sandwiching a core 
of the wet mixture between two sheets of heavy paper or fiberglass mats. 
When the core sets it is then dried in a large drying chamber, and the 
sandwich becomes rigid and strong enough for use as a building material.

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

#523558

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:muadhb$2bv$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>So what do the Planted Evidence People like BKD or Kidd or Michael say 
>>about
>>the size of the debris that floated away from GZ?
>
> "Planted Evidence People"?
>
> The very small amount of the towers that became smoke or dust particles
> and floated away would have been very small particles, yes.  No secret
> here. Smoke contains lots of very small particles, and drywall is very
> dusty when crushed.

Too bad you have to lie to yourself about where the Twin Towers ended up.

BTW I've done some research into you total bullshit about the Twin Towers 
ending up in the basement and the lowest levels were only dusty.  As a 
matter of fact only part of the top two floors of the basement showed any 
sign of damage.

And you would know that if you listened to the following video.  <G>

Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 -
 September 9, 2014
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTr5KwaC550

And there are too many different stories about what happened to the Pentagon 
to believe anything other than what we saw and what we saw was not 
consistent with a crash of an airliner.

Here, why don't you do something for a change and post photos of real 
airline crashes?  <G>

You will notice that airliners can fall apart in mid air and even fall apart 
with ruff landings so why do you think they could easily penetrate a steel 
and concrete building just like a CGI could when they should have flown 
apart long before they got to the Twin Towers?

Nope, your bullshit about what you think happened at the Pentagon is still 
inconsistent with the facts, inconsistent with crashes of real airliners and 
inconsistent with the Pentagon Lie-Witness Mike Walter so what good are any 
of your other theories?

Rocky

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

#523636

On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:06:30 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:muadhb$2bv$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>So what do the Planted Evidence People like BKD or Kidd or Michael say 
>>>about
>>>the size of the debris that floated away from GZ?
>>
>> "Planted Evidence People"?
>>
>> The very small amount of the towers that became smoke or dust particles
>> and floated away would have been very small particles, yes.  No secret
>> here. Smoke contains lots of very small particles, and drywall is very
>> dusty when crushed.
>
>Too bad you have to lie to yourself about where the Twin Towers ended up.
>

     Most ended up in the bathtub. This is not a secret.

>BTW I've done some research into you total bullshit about the Twin Towers 
>ending up in the basement 

     That's not the claim he made.

>and the lowest levels were only dusty.  As a 
>matter of fact only part of the top two floors of the basement showed any 
>sign of damage.

     Not true. In fact, Thomas posted links to pictures showing damage
in the subway.

>
>And you would know that if you listened to the following video.  <G>
>
>Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 -
> September 9, 2014
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTr5KwaC550
>

     A k00k, like Judy, is not a credible source.

>And there are too many different stories about what happened to the Pentagon 
>to believe anything other than what we saw and what we saw was not 
>consistent with a crash of an airliner.

     It was 100% consistent with the crash of an airliner.

>
>Here, why don't you do something for a change and post photos of real 
>airline crashes?  <G>

     Like the one at the Pentagon?

>
>You will notice that airliners can fall apart in mid air and even fall apart 
>with ruff landings so why do you think they could easily penetrate a steel 
>and concrete building just like a CGI could when they should have flown 
>apart long before they got to the Twin Towers?

     What steel building did any planes penetrate? While there were
steel girders on the twin towers, the steel was very low grade at the
point of impact. 

>
>Nope, your bullshit about what you think happened at the Pentagon is still 
>inconsistent with the facts, inconsistent with crashes of real airliners and 
>inconsistent with the Pentagon Lie-Witness Mike Walter so what good are any 
>of your other theories?

     Michael's claims are based in reality. It's a concept that is,
unfortunately, alien to you.
     I honestly wish that were an insult rather than the unvarnished
truth.

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

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

#523649

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:11aj0bhljplac8ec8gsc9chu815pkjmhfp@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:06:30 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:muadhb$2bv$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>So what do the Planted Evidence People like BKD or Kidd or Michael say
>>>>about
>>>>the size of the debris that floated away from GZ?
>>>
>>> "Planted Evidence People"?
>>>
>>> The very small amount of the towers that became smoke or dust particles
>>> and floated away would have been very small particles, yes.  No secret
>>> here. Smoke contains lots of very small particles, and drywall is very
>>> dusty when crushed.
>>
>>Too bad you have to lie to yourself about where the Twin Towers ended up.
>>
>
>     Most ended up in the bathtub. This is not a secret.

But the floors from 6-110 did not crush the Survivors in Stairwell B so 
those floors had to float away and do not give me shit about the very top of 
the Twin Towers didn't fall straight down because I want to know where 
floors 6-20 went.  <G>


>>BTW I've done some research into you total bullshit about the Twin Towers
>>ending up in the basement
>
>     That's not the claim he made.

BULLSHIT because he has tried to claim the debris ended up in the basement 
and I wanted to know how it missed the Survivors and why it didn't crush the 
free standing wall?

Then Michael came up with the exact same bullshit the Ediot thought of where 
the top of the Twin Towers didn't fall straight down but I don't care about 
the top of the Twin Towers I care about the floors right above the Survivors 
in WTC1.  DUH

The funny thing is NIST never tried to address why there were Survivors in 
WTC1 and without NIST the believers of the 9/11 bullshit have NOTHING.  <G>


>>and the lowest levels were only dusty.  As a
>>matter of fact only part of the top two floors of the basement showed any
>>sign of damage.
>
>     Not true. In fact, Thomas posted links to pictures showing damage
> in the subway.

Very little damage because you could still get down there to take photos. 
DUH

And besides Dimitri already covered the damage to the PATH so I already knew 
about that.


>>And you would know that if you listened to the following video.  <G>
>>
>>Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 -
>> September 9, 2014
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTr5KwaC550
>>
>
>     A k00k, like Judy, is not a credible source.

Not only are you without a source you are without a story as to how a 
complete 757 ended up inside the Pentagon.  <G>


>>And there are too many different stories about what happened to the 
>>Pentagon
>>to believe anything other than what we saw and what we saw was not
>>consistent with a crash of an airliner.
>
>     It was 100% consistent with the crash of an airliner.

riiight and you obviously missed the following:

911 CrashPhysics REAL plane hits bldg/ falls to the ground.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER6ZQUWvDFs


>>Here, why don't you do something for a change and post photos of real
>>airline crashes?  <G>
>
>     Like the one at the Pentagon?

OK, try to find a crash like the one at the Pentagon and try to find 
evidence that a 757 can fold it's wings back when landing.  <G>


>>You will notice that airliners can fall apart in mid air and even fall 
>>apart
>>with ruff landings so why do you think they could easily penetrate a steel
>>and concrete building just like a CGI could when they should have flown
>>apart long before they got to the Twin Towers?
>
>     What steel building did any planes penetrate? While there were
> steel girders on the twin towers, the steel was very low grade at the
> point of impact.

Even if it was very very low grade it was still be stronger than the 
aluminum that a real jet would have been made of.  DUH.

Besides that same exoskeleton that you are talking about managed to stick 
itself into the concrete by WTC3 pretty well so the exoskeleton couldn't 
have been that low grade.  <G>


>>Nope, your bullshit about what you think happened at the Pentagon is still
>>inconsistent with the facts, inconsistent with crashes of real airliners 
>>and
>>inconsistent with the Pentagon Lie-Witness Mike Walter so what good are 
>>any
>>of your other theories?
>
>     Michael's claims are based in reality. It's a concept that is,
> unfortunately, alien to you.

He claims one wing went inside the Pentagon without leaving any holes and he 
claims the other wing disintegrated without leaving any debris but both 
those stories are inconsistent with Mike Walter the Pentagon Lie-Witness 
that PM Magazine bases it's Pentagon Bullshit on.


>     I honestly wish that were an insult rather than the unvarnished
> truth.

You won't even try to argue facts.  You just take things that have not been 
proven or are inconsistent with other facts and keep spreading them around 
like a total idiot.

Facts are you have never tried to explain how the alleged Flight 77 made it 
by all sorts of cameras and then ended up completely inside the Pentagon 
where only one part made it back out.  Weird huh?

Oh yes, there was another part that made it back out of the Pentagon but it 
was covered with a tarp so it might have been the remains of a missile 
instead of a jet.

So you have a Pentagon where an airliner didn't scatter any debris around 
the area at the time it was supposed to have crashed and when was the crash 
exactly because there are even conflicting times to when that happened.  <G>

You have videos of jets flying into the Twin Towers that are consistent with 
CGIs flying into buildings because they didn't slow down and they didn't 
have any crash dynamics.

And you have parts of the Twin Towers standing strong as if whatever 
destroyed them could not vaporize the corners furthest from where they were 
detonated.  And do not forget there is a way to set off an underground nuke 
without a seismic signature and that is to have a pre-existing cavity.

And nobody to this very day has been able to tell us what Geiger counters 
registered at GZ.  <G>

Since nothing has changed I get to repost the OP:

  *********************************

Dr. Judy Wood on Red Pill Radio with Ashley Jones, Episode # 9 -
 September 9, 2014
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTr5KwaC550

While I have not listened to all of the above yet Judy has acknowledged that
the debris had to be very small to float up and she herself says up up and
up.  In her book she just said it had to be a certain size debris but not
what size.

Judy also points out that conventional explosives could not have converted
the Twin Towers to very small particles but she still would not say nukes
could do that.  <G>

So what do the Planted Evidence People like BKD or Kidd or Michael say about
the size of the debris that floated away from GZ?

Rocky

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

#523684

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>Here, why don't you do something for a change and post photos of real 
>airline crashes?  <G>

>You will notice that airliners can fall apart in mid air and even fall apart 
>with ruff landings so why do you think they could easily penetrate a steel 
>and concrete building just like a CGI could when they should have flown 
>apart long before they got to the Twin Towers?

OK, here's a non-kookvid of a jet crashing into a concrete barrier at 500
mph.  Notice how the plane breaks into large pieces and bounces off just
like you say, with a wing flying this way and the landing gear flying that
way, and the fuselage is broken and dented but completely recognizable,
and the tail decellerates and breaks into large pieces even before impact,
just like you say it should.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlXHl_Suv8g

<snicker>

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

#524667

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:muctnh$trc$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>Here, why don't you do something for a change and post photos of real
>>airline crashes?  <G>
>
>>You will notice that airliners can fall apart in mid air and even fall 
>>apart
>>with ruff landings so why do you think they could easily penetrate a steel
>>and concrete building just like a CGI could when they should have flown
>>apart long before they got to the Twin Towers?
>
> OK, here's a non-kookvid of a jet crashing into a concrete barrier at 500
> mph.  Notice how the plane breaks into large pieces and bounces off just
> like you say, with a wing flying this way and the landing gear flying that
> way, and the fuselage is broken and dented but completely recognizable,
> and the tail decellerates and breaks into large pieces even before impact,
> just like you say it should.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlXHl_Suv8g
>
> <snicker>

Now that is a kook vid because it is cut way too short to be of any use.

But then again, that is just like you and NIST to avoid the real issues like 
how did a 757 get through a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete that was 
reinforced with Kevlar?

9/11/01 was a very big joke played on the public and you would have known 
that if you ever looked for any inconsistencies with the government's 
fairytales yourself.

To start with they never had any photos of the alleged hijackers at the 
correct airports and if they really planned to do a dastardly deed do you 
really think they would only give themselves a 15 minute turn over at Boston 
when it takes an hour to be on the safe side.

I've flown before and it takes a lot of time just to get off of one jet and 
then it take more time just to get on another yet the alleged hijackers only 
gave themselves 15 minutes for that?  No way, they certainly missed their 
connecting flights which were replaced with CGIs anyway.  And oddly enough 
the original passenger list for the four flights didn't have the names of 
any of the alleged hijackers on them.  <G>

WHAT REALLY IS THE MATRIX - the 9/11 movie you didn´t see
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssmdD5l8Icg

Rocky 

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

#525267

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>But then again, that is just like you and NIST to avoid the real issues like 
>how did a 757 get through a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete that was 
>reinforced with Kevlar?

What are you doing, kOOktard, trying to see how many lies you can cram
into a single sentence?  Everything between Columns 9 and 18 on the first
floor was taken out by the jet, as well as the panels between Cols 8 and 9
and 18 and 20.  That's not a 16' hole.  The wall thickness varied between
13" and 18" of reinforced concrete, brick and limestone, not 6 feet. There
was Kevlar, but its purpose was to prevent bricks and chunks of concrete
from being made into missiles in the event of a truck bomb (why the
Pentagon was reinforced in the first place).  Kevlar won't stop much when
the very columns it's attached to are taken out, immediately followed by
the mass of a 757...

>To start with they never had any photos of the alleged hijackers at the 
>correct airports

Nope, there were security pictures of hijackers going through airport 
security.

>  And oddly enough 
>the original passenger list for the four flights didn't have the names of 
>any of the alleged hijackers on them.  <G>

The VICTIM lists didn't list the hijackers, of course.  Places that go
into more detail, such as the seat assignments of the hijackers do list
them, of course.

>WHAT REALLY IS THE MATRIX - the 9/11 movie you didn´t see

Yet another kookvid full of lies?  How many hours is that one?

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

#525293

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mv5tpg$m5g$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>But then again, that is just like you and NIST to avoid the real issues 
>>like
>>how did a 757 get through a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete that 
>>was
>>reinforced with Kevlar?
>
> What are you doing, kOOktard, trying to see how many lies you can cram
> into a single sentence?  Everything between Columns 9 and 18 on the first
> floor was taken out by the jet, as well as the panels between Cols 8 and 9
> and 18 and 20.  That's not a 16' hole.  The wall thickness varied between
> 13" and 18" of reinforced concrete, brick and limestone, not 6 feet. There
> was Kevlar, but its purpose was to prevent bricks and chunks of concrete
> from being made into missiles in the event of a truck bomb (why the
> Pentagon was reinforced in the first place).  Kevlar won't stop much when
> the very columns it's attached to are taken out, immediately followed by
> the mass of a 757...

Still it does not matter how much the alleged 757 weighed because it was 
like a giant egg filled with jet fuel that should have broken the wing tanks 
wide open if it really hit those light poles since other jets in Washington 
have broken apart after hitting light poles.  DUH
.

>>To start with they never had any photos of the alleged hijackers at the
>>correct airports
>
> Nope, there were security pictures of hijackers going through airport
> security.

But it was at the wrong airport and they only gave themselves 15 minutes 
between flights?  I'd always given myself an hour between flights and even 
that wasn't enough for one particular connecting flight.  Nope doesn't sound 
like they had a real plan.

And do not forget about the video that was not from a security camera. 
There was no date and time stamp on that movie so it could have been for 
anything at all and practically anywhere.  And why the hell would people 
take a movie of people at an airport unless it was suitable for framing? 
<G>


>>  And oddly enough
>>the original passenger list for the four flights didn't have the names of
>>any of the alleged hijackers on them.  <G>
>
> The VICTIM lists didn't list the hijackers, of course.  Places that go
> into more detail, such as the seat assignments of the hijackers do list
> them, of course.

It was supposed to be a passenger list and they were not passengers?  Nope, 
there are way too many things wrong with the great 9/11 Hijacker Hoax to 
believe any of it like the jet at the Pentagon that flowed into the Pentagon 
and even you admit it should have splashed all over the place instead.


>>WHAT REALLY IS THE MATRIX - the 9/11 movie you didn´t see
>
> Yet another kookvid full of lies?  How many hours is that one?

You are doing yourself a disfavor by passing judgment on someone just 
because they see so many inconsistencies with the official fairytales.  Heck 
even you caught an inconsistency with the Popular Mechanics bullshit and 
they aren't even consistent with NIST because NIST knew the Twin Towers 
could not be described as a pancake collapse because there were no pancakes 
at ground level.  <G>
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

And guess what I now have thanks to dmaster from alt.conspiracy.  I have a 
video of an underground nuke that has no flash and no air blast wave so that 
would make it a lot like the three nukes used at Ground Zero.  Heck it 
probably doesn't have much above ground radiation of seismic signature 
either.  <G>

Unedited footage of underground nuclear bomb blast
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE4pwEjPTVc

Rocky 

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

#525362

On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 14:15:12 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:

>"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>But then again, that is just like you and NIST to avoid the real issues like 
>>how did a 757 get through a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete that was 
>>reinforced with Kevlar?
>
>What are you doing, kOOktard, trying to see how many lies you can cram
>into a single sentence?  Everything between Columns 9 and 18 on the first
>floor was taken out by the jet, as well as the panels between Cols 8 and 9
>and 18 and 20.  That's not a 16' hole.  The wall thickness varied between
>13" and 18" of reinforced concrete, brick and limestone, not 6 feet. There
>was Kevlar, but its purpose was to prevent bricks and chunks of concrete
>from being made into missiles in the event of a truck bomb (why the
>Pentagon was reinforced in the first place).  Kevlar won't stop much when
>the very columns it's attached to are taken out, immediately followed by
>the mass of a 757...
>
>>To start with they never had any photos of the alleged hijackers at the 
>>correct airports
>
>Nope, there were security pictures of hijackers going through airport 
>security.
>
>>  And oddly enough 
>>the original passenger list for the four flights didn't have the names of 
>>any of the alleged hijackers on them.  <G>
>
>The VICTIM lists didn't list the hijackers, of course.  Places that go
>into more detail, such as the seat assignments of the hijackers do list
>them, of course.
>
>>WHAT REALLY IS THE MATRIX - the 9/11 movie you didn´t see
>
>Yet another kookvid full of lies?  How many hours is that one?

     Since Roger has PROVED that all 9/11 k00k vids present nothing
but lies, I have to wonder why he keeps linking to them. I doubt he
actually knows himself, so his offering an answer as to why isn't very
likely.

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

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web