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 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-28 15:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <s1aj0b5uk7dlf0mtnosq4a6s5t7c2eivv6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523572 |
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 16:20:40 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>>Thanks for proving there weren't any nukes there, Rocky!
>
>> What is most sad is how many times he's proved nukes weren't
>>used, yet is compelled to claim they were.
>
>Yup. This time, Rocky has proved once and for all that there were no nukes,
>by using the "duck test". He has also proven that all kookvids contain lies,
>because if one witness lies about the Pentagon plane, all NYC witnesses must
>be lying about what they saw. Applying Rocky's logic, if one kookvid contains
>a lie, all kookvids must be lies. And since I proved the video clip with the
>crane has been falsified, we now know all kookvids are lies.
>
>Since Rocky has proven with the "duck test" that there were no nukes at the
>World Trade Center, and he has also proven that all kookvids are lies, we
>don't even need to continue this discusion at all any more.
Not the worst idea ever.
Everyone should cease paying attention to Rocky's expression of
his delusions regarding 9/11. He's already proved what happened was
*exactly* as reported by the 9/11 Commission. Unless he's going to
claim he was lying with his duck test, and other evidence, then he's
stuck with his having proved 9/11 was as it appears.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-01 15:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mujjbf$ti2$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #523438 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >Too bad that nukes at Ground Zero pass the Duck Test: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test >And CGIs at Ground Zero also pass the Duck Test: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test You know, while I showed how Rocky proved there were no nukes at Ground Zero using his excellent Duck Test, I neglected to point out that he also proved there were no CGIs at Ground Zero using that same excellent Duck Test. 1) CGIs don't kill anyone except other CGIs. Airplane crashes tend to kill lots of people. Lots of people died from the impacts that day. They were real airplane crashes. It doesn't walk like a duck. 2) CGIs are silent. Airplane crashes are very noisy. The 9/11 airline crashes were very noisy. So it doesn't quack like a duck. 3) CGIs in 2001 required big, heavy CRT monitors to see, or, later, CRT TV screens or movie screens, and then only from the right direction. Airliners are visible from any direction as long as you have a clear line of sight. The South Tower crash was videoed from any number of directions. It doesn't swim like a duck. 4) CGIs, to be transferred, need a computer network connection to transfer them between devices. There were no computer network cables spotted connecting the thousands of video cameras to some master CGI system. And humans never did have computer network connections. So it doesn't have a duck bill like a duck. 5) US 175 was videoed from almost every angle and most of the videos don't have MPEG artifacts creating disappearing wings or things like that. A CGI might have that, but in every view. So it doesn't fly like a duck. 6) The farthest a CGI could be viewed from in 2001 would be on something like a Jumbotron that allows video to be seen across a large football stadium. The Twin Towers crashes were seen from miles away. So it doesn't have webbed feet like a duck. So, not only has Rocky proven to us that no nukes were used on 9/11, and that all kookvids are full of lies, Rocky has proved, using the Duck Test that no CGIs were used on 9/11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-01 15:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tYydnTju2-CKA5DLnZ2dnUU7-UGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524089 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mujjbf$ti2$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>Too bad that nukes at Ground Zero pass the Duck Test: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test > >>And CGIs at Ground Zero also pass the Duck Test: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test > > You know, while I showed how Rocky proved there were no nukes at Ground > Zero using his excellent Duck Test, I neglected to point out that he also > proved there were no CGIs at Ground Zero using that same excellent Duck > Test. riiight > 1) CGIs don't kill anyone except other CGIs. Airplane crashes tend to > kill lots of people. Lots of people died from the impacts that day. > They were real airplane crashes. It doesn't walk like a duck. There were bombs too you clown. > 2) CGIs are silent. Airplane crashes are very noisy. The 9/11 airline > crashes were very noisy. So it doesn't quack like a duck. ROTFLMAO because I've seen one video where the sound of the jet/CGI didn't stop at the alleged crash and I'd been told they screwed that up in real life too. <G> > 3) CGIs in 2001 required big, heavy CRT monitors to see, or, later, CRT TV > screens or movie screens, and then only from the right direction. > Airliners are visible from any direction as long as you have a clear line > of sight. The South Tower crash was videoed from any number of > directions. It doesn't swim like a duck. That is why they used a 3D image of Nuke York City so all they needed to get the right CGI for that location was the location that the video was taken. DUH. > 4) CGIs, to be transferred, need a computer network connection to transfer > them between devices. There were no computer network cables spotted > connecting the thousands of video cameras to some master CGI system. And > humans never did have computer network connections. So it doesn't have a > duck bill like a duck. Too bad there was more than one video with no CGIs at all or with a ball instead of a jet. <G> > 5) US 175 was videoed from almost every angle and most of the videos don't > have MPEG artifacts creating disappearing wings or things like that. A > CGI might have that, but in every view. So it doesn't fly like a duck. Too bad nobody and I mean nobody has been able to prove the disappearing wing was an MPEG arifact. But it has bee proven 3D images will lose wings if they are programmed to reflect the sky. > 6) The farthest a CGI could be viewed from in 2001 would be on something > like a Jumbotron that allows video to be seen across a large football > stadium. The Twin Towers crashes were seen from miles away. So it doesn't > have webbed feet like a duck. Again, you can't name just one witness that saw a jet in real life and just like the Pentagon witness Mike Walter that changed his story 3 times the Nuke York City witnesses could have also changed their stories. DUH. > So, not only has Rocky proven to us that no nukes were used on 9/11, and > that all kookvids are full of lies, Rocky has proved, using the Duck Test > that no CGIs were used on 9/11. Problem is your very first try to explain the lack of debris at the Twin Towers failed and you don't get another try. The fact remains only one thing explains the following and you know what that is. <G> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-02 17:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mumg18$tu9$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #524125 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> You know, while I showed how Rocky proved there were no nukes at Ground >> Zero using his excellent Duck Test, I neglected to point out that he also >> proved there were no CGIs at Ground Zero using that same excellent Duck >> Test. >riiight Yup, you're right, all right. Using the Duck Test not only to prove there were no nukes but to prove there were no CGIs was a pure stroke of genius! You are brilliant, Rocky! Oh, I don't want to take away this one piece of your proof I left out. 7) CGIs don't leave debris behind. Once they're turned off, they're gone. The 9/11 planes left things like landing gear and engine parts on the streets of NYC plus 95% of a plane inside the Pentagon. So it doesn't have feathers like a duck. Thanks again for the pure genius, Rocky!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-03 15:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <KYudnZUeHZoXqI3LnZ2dnUU7-IWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524252 |
alt.astronomy put back in "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mumg18$tu9$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>> You know, while I showed how Rocky proved there were no nukes at Ground >>> Zero using his excellent Duck Test, I neglected to point out that he >>> also >>> proved there were no CGIs at Ground Zero using that same excellent Duck >>> Test. > >>riiight > > Yup, you're right, all right. Using the Duck Test not only to prove there > were no nukes but to prove there were no CGIs was a pure stroke of genius! > You are brilliant, Rocky! > > Oh, I don't want to take away this one piece of your proof I left out. > 7) CGIs don't leave debris behind. But people with vans do. And why not hollow out or shrink down a large engine part to make it easier to move? Oh, that would go for the engine found at the Pentagon too because it was a lot smaller than the original. <G> > Once they're turned off, they're gone. > The 9/11 planes left things like landing gear and engine parts on the > streets of NYC plus 95% of a plane inside the Pentagon. So it doesn't > have feathers like a duck. What people claimed and what we were allowed to see are two different things. If they really rebuilt the jets like they rebuilt Flight 800 we would have known about it but no all we were given was fairtales about what was left. > Thanks again for the pure genius, Rocky!! Since you clearly forgot why there was no sound in the Evan Fairbanks video I'll repost it for you: ******** OP ******** 9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Published on Feb 17, 2013 Video says all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVIEuGWMFDo Wow, the video sure does say it all. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-04 20:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mus0go$vnh$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #524415 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> Once they're turned off, they're gone. >> The 9/11 planes left things like landing gear and engine parts on the >> streets of NYC plus 95% of a plane inside the Pentagon. So it doesn't >> have feathers like a duck. >What people claimed and what we were allowed to see are two different >things. If they really rebuilt the jets like they rebuilt Flight 800 we >would have known about it but no all we were given was fairtales about what >was left. This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 Slow motion (turn off sound): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ8uvQk1H9I Do you think they could put those pieces of dust back together like they did with the relatively few pieces of Flight 800? Why would you think Flight 77 or Flight 93 after impact resembled Flight 800 more than that F-4 Phantom? >Since you clearly forgot why there was no sound in the Evan Fairbanks video >I'll repost it for you: >9/11 Fake Witness Exposed + Why Evan Fairbanks video has no audio Kooktard, why are you posting a kooklink to a kookvid, after you already proved to us that all kookvids are full of lies? Are we supposed to count the lies or something? We'll need one of those clicky counter things, right?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-04 17:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mrmdnXuBSYFoP4zLnZ2dnUU7-eWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524544 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:mus0go$vnh$2@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>> Once they're turned off, they're gone. >>> The 9/11 planes left things like landing gear and engine parts on the >>> streets of NYC plus 95% of a plane inside the Pentagon. So it doesn't >>> have feathers like a duck. > >>What people claimed and what we were allowed to see are two different >>things. If they really rebuilt the jets like they rebuilt Flight 800 we >>would have known about it but no all we were given was fairtales about >>what >>was left. > > This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 How can that video claim it just disappeared into dust when they never showed the ground afterwards? Don't forget the Twin Towers left dust all over the place and other jets that hit buildings left themselves on the ground. And don't forget that the roadrunner cutouts in the Twin Towers were not a perfect match for what was supposed to have hit them. 9/11 PLANES HOAX http://911planeshoax.com/tag/911-drone/ The North Tower cutout was missing part of the right wing and the excuse for that given by the Ediot on alt.conspiracy was the tips of the wings were not strong enough. While that statement is true it was not like that for the South Tower and if any part of the wing of a CGI made it to the ground I'm sure the news would have told us about it. <G> > Slow motion (turn off sound): > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ8uvQk1H9I > > Do you think they could put those pieces of dust back together like they > did with the relatively few pieces of Flight 800? Why would you think > Flight 77 or Flight 93 after impact resembled Flight 800 more than that > F-4 Phantom? You are assuming it was dust but that was not proven because they stopped the video before anything could settle to the ground. DUH. So because you are not telling us the entire story you could be bullshitting just like NIST did with why WTC7 came down. NIST limited their investigation to RDX only and not nukes which made it easy for them to help cover up the facts behind the total destruction of WTC7. And we know that right before WTC7 came down someone heard what sounded like a jet engine, other people turned and looked at WTC7 when that happened. The person that claimed he heard what sounded like a jet engine claimed he saw the top of WTC7 shake and that is consistent with what happened to WTC2 when it was nuked. Then there were a few seconds with nothing while an underground cavity was growing before the nuke made it's way out and the building fell because the vaporized part could no longer support the top or non-vaporized part. And again, this is not the remains of a building collapse or two: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzrescue1.html The above photo is the remains of a Nuclear Demolition where the underground nuke was over to one side of the building. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-04 23:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <3pn8ec-q27.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #524566 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > > "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message > news:mus0go$vnh$2@pcls7.std.com... >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> >>>> Once they're turned off, they're gone. >>>> The 9/11 planes left things like landing gear and engine parts on the >>>> streets of NYC plus 95% of a plane inside the Pentagon. So it doesn't >>>> have feathers like a duck. >> >>>What people claimed and what we were allowed to see are two different >>>things. If they really rebuilt the jets like they rebuilt Flight 800 we >>>would have known about it but no all we were given was fairtales about >>>what >>>was left. >> >> This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 > > How can that video claim it just disappeared into dust when they never > showed the ground afterwards? It is blazingly obvious what happened, you ignorant, ineducable, raving lunatic. <snip remaining insane babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 04:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <must25$2gb$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #524566 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:mus0go$vnh$2@pcls7.std.com... >> This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 >How can that video claim it just disappeared into dust when they never >showed the ground afterwards? You are too stooopid to see what happened? The dust was flying! Are you really that kooktarded??? Oh, so maybe there were a couple of "big" pieces in the slow-mo version, maybe a few square inches each.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 03:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <drd41b9a5ksmsk8qb9lor76lpud1rg5m09@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524602 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 04:07:33 +0000 (UTC),
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote:
>"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mus0go$vnh$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>> This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0
>
>>How can that video claim it just disappeared into dust when they never
>>showed the ground afterwards?
>
>You are too stooopid to see what happened? The dust was flying! Are you
>really that kooktarded??? Oh, so maybe there were a couple of "big"
>pieces in the slow-mo version, maybe a few square inches each.
Rocky isn't pretending when he exposes his learning disability.
"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 | 2015-10-05 10:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <l5ednX-aR59bAY_LnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524602 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:must25$2gb$4@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:mus0go$vnh$2@pcls7.std.com... >>> This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. >>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 > >>How can that video claim it just disappeared into dust when they never >>showed the ground afterwards? > > You are too stooopid to see what happened? The dust was flying! Are you > really that kooktarded??? Oh, so maybe there were a couple of "big" > pieces in the slow-mo version, maybe a few square inches each. Oh I get it. You want me to fall for the same crap the media has fed you for years. Sorry, I want to see what was left on the ground afterwards before I'll say it was turned to dust. <G> And besides turning to dust and being converted into ultra fine particles is very different and only a nuke or two could do what was done to the Twin Towers and at the same time leave walls that were untouched at the very bottom of the Twin Towers. http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzrescue1.html http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 16:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <muu7v0$2f2$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #524660 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >Oh I get it. You want me to fall for the same crap the media has fed you >for years. Sorry, I want to see what was left on the ground afterwards >before I'll say it was turned to dust. <G> So you just want to plug your ears and say "na na I can't hear you!" like a 5 year old, and then you'll come back and say "where are the broken wings and twisted fuselage and bent tail like on Flight 800?" even though that video clearly shows what happens when a 500 mph jet meets solid concrete. <snip babble>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 11:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <DJydnSmKpfR8No_LnZ2dnUU7-eWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524666 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:muu7v0$2f2$2@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>Oh I get it. You want me to fall for the same crap the media has fed you >>for years. Sorry, I want to see what was left on the ground afterwards >>before I'll say it was turned to dust. <G> > > So you just want to plug your ears and say "na na I can't hear you!" > like a 5 year old, and then you'll come back and say "where are the > broken wings and twisted fuselage and bent tail like on Flight 800?" even > though that video clearly shows what happens when a 500 mph jet meets > solid concrete. > > <snip babble> ROTFLMAO ok let us take a step back. You say "This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 " even though you know that is inconsistent with what happened at the Pentagon where a jet made a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete reinforced with Kevlar. Now you are on the right page where the 9/11 story is filled with inconsistencies like where one jet flies apart and another jet makes a great big hole in thick concrete. That is just like the inconsistencies with the World Trade Center where only nukes could do what was done to three buildings at the World Trade Center and yet certain evidence does not support what others saw and heard. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg There, now you know that it is the inconsistencies with the 9/11 stories that leave so much room for doubt. <G> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 18:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <muuamr$nho$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #524680 |
On 05/10/2015 17:56, Rocky wrote: > "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message > news:muu7v0$2f2$2@pcls7.std.com... >> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >> >>> Oh I get it. You want me to fall for the same crap the media has fed you >>> for years. Sorry, I want to see what was left on the ground afterwards >>> before I'll say it was turned to dust. <G> >> >> So you just want to plug your ears and say "na na I can't hear you!" >> like a 5 year old, and then you'll come back and say "where are the >> broken wings and twisted fuselage and bent tail like on Flight 800?" even >> though that video clearly shows what happens when a 500 mph jet meets >> solid concrete. >> >> <snip babble> > > ROTFLMAO ok let us take a step back. You say > > "This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 " > > even though you know that is inconsistent with what happened at the Pentagon > where a jet made a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete reinforced with > Kevlar. Yet another lie from you, even your own links go to pages that say that the hole was about 75'. Why do you lie all the time? > > Now you are on the right page where the 9/11 story is filled with > inconsistencies like where one jet flies apart and another jet makes a great > big hole in thick concrete. > > That is just like the inconsistencies with the World Trade Center where only > nukes could do what was done to three buildings at the World Trade Center > and yet certain evidence does not support what others saw and heard. > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > There, now you know that it is the inconsistencies with the 9/11 stories > that leave so much room for doubt. <G> > http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg > > Rocky > > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 12:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <UOWdndWb1OYiLY_LnZ2dnUU7-QmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #524683 |
"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:muuamr$nho$1@dont-email.me... > On 05/10/2015 17:56, Rocky wrote: >> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >> news:muu7v0$2f2$2@pcls7.std.com... >>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>> >>>> Oh I get it. You want me to fall for the same crap the media has fed >>>> you >>>> for years. Sorry, I want to see what was left on the ground afterwards >>>> before I'll say it was turned to dust. <G> >>> >>> So you just want to plug your ears and say "na na I can't hear you!" >>> like a 5 year old, and then you'll come back and say "where are the >>> broken wings and twisted fuselage and bent tail like on Flight 800?" >>> even >>> though that video clearly shows what happens when a 500 mph jet meets >>> solid concrete. >>> >>> <snip babble> >> >> ROTFLMAO ok let us take a step back. You say >> >> "This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 " >> >> even though you know that is inconsistent with what happened at the >> Pentagon >> where a jet made a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete reinforced >> with >> Kevlar. > > Yet another lie from you, even your own links go to pages that say that > the hole was about 75'. Why do you do shit like that? You know damn well that before the wall of the Pentagon collapsed the hole was barely 16 foot wide. >> Now you are on the right page where the 9/11 story is filled with >> inconsistencies like where one jet flies apart and another jet makes a >> great >> big hole in thick concrete. >> >> That is just like the inconsistencies with the World Trade Center where >> only >> nukes could do what was done to three buildings at the World Trade Center >> and yet certain evidence does not support what others saw and heard. >> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >> >> There, now you know that it is the inconsistencies with the 9/11 stories >> that leave so much room for doubt. <G> >> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg >> >> Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 15:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <s9j51bdetb5gkccfcb1i605unc8rshtipj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #524683 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 18:08:36 +0100, Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >On 05/10/2015 17:56, Rocky wrote: >> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >> news:muu7v0$2f2$2@pcls7.std.com... >>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>> >>>> Oh I get it. You want me to fall for the same crap the media has fed you >>>> for years. Sorry, I want to see what was left on the ground afterwards >>>> before I'll say it was turned to dust. <G> >>> >>> So you just want to plug your ears and say "na na I can't hear you!" >>> like a 5 year old, and then you'll come back and say "where are the >>> broken wings and twisted fuselage and bent tail like on Flight 800?" even >>> though that video clearly shows what happens when a 500 mph jet meets >>> solid concrete. >>> >>> <snip babble> >> >> ROTFLMAO ok let us take a step back. You say >> >> "This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 " >> >> even though you know that is inconsistent with what happened at the Pentagon >> where a jet made a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete reinforced with >> Kevlar. > >Yet another lie from you, even your own links go to pages that say that >the hole was about 75'. > >Why do you lie all the time? He lies because Roger Rocky is certifiably insane. But you know this already. :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 09:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mv3btp$gep$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #524727 |
On 10/5/2015 2:20 PM, Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 18:08:36 +0100, Tony Dragon > <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote: >> On 05/10/2015 17:56, Rocky wrote: >>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>> news:muu7v0$2f2$2@pcls7.std.com... >>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >>>>> Oh I get it. You want me to fall for the same crap the media has fed you >>>>> for years. Sorry, I want to see what was left on the ground afterwards >>>>> before I'll say it was turned to dust. <G> >>>> >>>> So you just want to plug your ears and say "na na I can't hear you!" >>>> like a 5 year old, and then you'll come back and say "where are the >>>> broken wings and twisted fuselage and bent tail like on Flight 800?" even >>>> though that video clearly shows what happens when a 500 mph jet meets >>>> solid concrete. >>>> <snip babble> >>> >>> ROTFLMAO ok let us take a step back. You say >>> >>> "This is what happens when a jet hits concrete at 500 mph. >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q35xHzjxB0 " >>> even though you know that is inconsistent with what happened at the Pentagon >>> where a jet made a 16 foot wide hole in 6 feet of concrete reinforced with >>> Kevlar. >> >> Yet another lie from you, even your own links go to pages that say that >> the hole was about 75'. >> Why do you lie all the time? > > He lies because Roger Rocky is certifiably insane. But you know > this already. :) > Rocky is bored with TV, so he flops like a fish in here
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-04 17:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mus915$s39$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #524544 |
On 10/4/2015 3:00 PM, Michael Moroney wrote: > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: I like this part; (it is about you Rocky ! ) > Kooktard, why are you posting a kooklink to a kookvid, after you already > proved to us that all kookvids are full of lies? Are we supposed to count > the lies or something? We'll need one of those clicky counter things, > right? >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-27 07:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mu8klt$4v1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #523319 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:23:42 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> <SIGH> >>>> Have you not seen the video of a CNN news reporter on the scene at >>>> the Pentagon, literally minutes after the incident occured. >>> >>> Yes I have. >>> >>>> He even clearly states that he was there BEFORE the building >>>> collapsed, and there was no sign of a passenger jet airliner crash. >>> >>> Wrong. Watch the video again. The reporter is asked by Judy >>> Woodruff if there is any evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon. >>> >>> The Reporter's response, a direct quote from the video: >>> >>> " there is no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the >>> Pentagon. The only site is the actual side of the building that has >>> crashed in. As I said the only pieces left that you can see are small >>> enough that you can pick up in your hand and there are no large tail >>> sections, wing sections, a fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around >>> which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of >>> the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse. >>> >>> >>>> 9/11 CNN Pentagon Report - NO PLANE - Only Aired Once >>>> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BNqgNvUhRQ >> >> >> >> >> >> Lets see >> " there is no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the >> Pentagon. " > > Technically correct as the airplane crashed INTO the Pentagon with > most of the pieces winding up INSIDE the Pentagon, drooling kook. Ohhhh,.....I never thought of that. How convienient for you that the reporter didn't just say "NO EVEIDENCE HERE OF ANY PLANES " Oh wait, He did. BZZZZZZZZZZT,. Sorry, you don't win the jackpot, but we have a lovely consolation prize, and thanks for playing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-27 08:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pspf0bppcm0n0mu8l06utvltgogdft2d9p@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #523408 |
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 07:43:32 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:23:42 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> <SIGH> >>>>> Have you not seen the video of a CNN news reporter on the scene at >>>>> the Pentagon, literally minutes after the incident occured. >>>> >>>> Yes I have. >>>> >>>>> He even clearly states that he was there BEFORE the building >>>>> collapsed, and there was no sign of a passenger jet airliner crash. >>>> >>>> Wrong. Watch the video again. The reporter is asked by Judy >>>> Woodruff if there is any evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon. >>>> >>>> The Reporter's response, a direct quote from the video: >>>> >>>> " there is no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the >>>> Pentagon. The only site is the actual side of the building that has >>>> crashed in. As I said the only pieces left that you can see are small >>>> enough that you can pick up in your hand and there are no large tail >>>> sections, wing sections, a fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around >>>> which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of >>>> the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 9/11 CNN Pentagon Report - NO PLANE - Only Aired Once >>>>> >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BNqgNvUhRQ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Lets see >>> " there is no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the >>> Pentagon. " >> >> Technically correct as the airplane crashed INTO the Pentagon with >> most of the pieces winding up INSIDE the Pentagon, drooling kook. > > > > > >Ohhhh,.....I never thought of that. >How convienient for you that the reporter .... The reporter said, " the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon ..." " ..there are no large tail sections, wing sections, a fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web