Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #541058 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-12-23 09:16 -0600 |
| Last post | 2015-12-26 07:03 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 120 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-23 09:16 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-23 08:01 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-23 10:50 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-23 09:05 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-23 14:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-24 09:18 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2015-12-24 18:44 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-24 15:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2015-12-25 02:50 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-25 06:09 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 06:44 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-25 14:07 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-26 08:09 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-26 12:21 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2015-12-26 17:36 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-26 10:39 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-26 14:51 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-26 16:14 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-26 20:24 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-27 05:26 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-27 08:55 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-28 03:58 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-27 16:32 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-27 16:29 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-28 01:13 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-31 17:10 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-01 06:46 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-01 07:32 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-01 17:50 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-01 12:03 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 12:36 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-28 01:40 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-12-28 11:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 04:57 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-29 08:55 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-29 16:59 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-29 14:34 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-29 21:37 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-29 16:34 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-29 23:09 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-29 17:19 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-30 10:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-31 16:54 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-01 06:34 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-01 00:40 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 12:36 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-03 07:02 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-04 13:20 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 12:36 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 17:47 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 17:47 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 17:46 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-23 12:36 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-23 14:47 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-23 16:16 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-23 21:37 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-24 00:43 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-24 03:57 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-24 03:18 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-24 03:56 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-23 14:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-23 16:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-23 15:35 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-23 18:25 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-23 17:34 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-24 00:00 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-23 23:48 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-24 00:45 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-24 00:44 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-24 08:09 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-25 07:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 06:55 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-25 14:08 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-25 23:33 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 20:06 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-26 10:38 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-26 07:03 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-25 09:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 09:08 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-25 14:10 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-25 14:09 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-26 10:20 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-26 09:50 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-26 11:37 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-26 11:36 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-24 08:27 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-23 21:43 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-24 00:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-24 08:29 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-24 09:38 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-24 20:46 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-24 17:00 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-25 00:43 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-24 19:38 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-25 23:33 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-25 06:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-24 22:46 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-25 07:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 06:56 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-25 06:18 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-25 23:33 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-12-27 02:03 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-27 05:26 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-24 03:56 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-24 03:11 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-24 03:56 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-24 06:46 -0800
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-24 20:46 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-12-24 15:55 -0500
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2015-12-25 02:57 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 09:55 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-25 06:07 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 10:03 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-25 23:33 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-26 00:22 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 19:26 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-26 03:25 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-12-25 22:21 -0600
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-26 10:38 +0000
Re: 9/11 was a CGI job "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-12-26 07:03 -0600
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-29 17:19 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <N-WdnRNc56vyiB7LnZ2dnUU7-YnOydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #542189 |
"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:n5v3m4$lvu$1@dont-email.me... > On 29/12/2015 22:34, Rocky wrote: >> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message >> news:n5uu9l$th0$1@dont-email.me... >>> On 29/12/2015 20:34, Rocky wrote: >>>> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message >>>> news:n5ue1a$vhd$2@dont-email.me... >>>>> On 29/12/2015 14:55, Rocky wrote: >>>>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:rnp48blhio18pt9ljt17esj2tpgmm51btv@4ax.com... >>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:02:36 -0500, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In article <opp18bdamnfjcu77ret4mat6vstuceldde@4ax.com>, >>>>>>>> compuelf@gmail.com says... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 16:29:40 -0500, "Bast" >>>>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Not really,....but I don't really expect that you would >>>>>>>>>>> understand >>>>>>>>>>> basic common sense. >>>>>>>>>>> And you have probably gotten used to that whistling sound by >>>>>>>>>>> now. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *** Whatever it is that ails you, Bastie, it's nothing that >>>>>>>>>>> couldn't >>>>>>>>>>> be fixed by a good horse fucking. Preferably against your >>>>>>>>>>> strenuous objections. I bet you also make those adoring and >>>>>>>>>>> apropos oinking noises as the Johnson does its work ... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just because something works for YOU,....doesn't mean it will >>>>>>>>>> work >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> anyone else. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Besides, I hear Mr Ed is still in therapy after you snuck into >>>>>>>>>> his >>>>>>>>>> stall, >>>>>>>>>> and nailed the doors shut. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> While the neighbors heard a blood curdling,.... >>>>>>>>>> "Willllllbbuuurrr, get this hagar outta here" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Interesting. >>>>>>>>> Do you experience bestiality fantasies a lot? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One more symptom of her batshit craziness. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Her bestiality fantasies are certainly not normal. But so >>>>>>> long >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> they remain fantasies, she's not causing any harm. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, it is clear that BKD and K are two living hijackers. >>>>> >>>>> Do tell what they have hijacked? >>>> >>>> This thread stupid. >>>> >>>> >>>>>> And we could find 19 more living suicide hijackers if the media did >>>>>> better >>>>>> work on finding out where the hijackers went after they names were >>>>>> smeared >>>>>> all over the place by the media. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So you want to know where they went after they died. >>>> >>>> ROTFLMAO because you think the scapegoats died? Hardly. >>> >>> Ehh, yes. >>> >>>> >>>> And if they all the hijackers had been real people they could have all >>>> lived >>>> but some of the names were just made up so they never lived or died. >>>> >>>> Rocky >>>> >>>> >>> >>> So if the hijackers were real, they would have lived after their plane >>> crashed into the TT's, what a quaint idea. >> >> Why do you think it was a "quaint idea" > > Because of the reason I gave, which was what you posted. But what you saw never happened in real life and could not happen in real life because the crash dynamics were missing. And never forget the reason all the videos of a jet ramming the South Tower end so abruptly. It is because they didn't want to broadcast the explosions necessary to cut the holes in the Twin Towers because the CGIs they used on the Twin Towers could not do that themselves. DUH >> when the videos themselves prove >> that the jets in Nuke York City were consistent with CGIs that were >> programmed to be reflective? And 3 different CGIs too. >> > > Reflective CGI's, that's new. Not really because they were used on 9/11/01 you clown. >> In one case the disappearing wing reflects the South Tower and in another >> case the disappearing wing reflects the sky. And real jets never have >> disappearing wings. DUH >> >> Again, what you and millions of others saw on TV were just GGIs and there >> was a lot of money paid out to get people to say "the plane", "the plane" >> just like that guy on Fantasy Island because the jets in Nuke York City >> really were just a fantasy brought to life by lies and CGIs. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-30 10:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n60bm5$tq4$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #542192 |
On 29/12/2015 23:19, Rocky wrote: > "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:n5v3m4$lvu$1@dont-email.me... >> On 29/12/2015 22:34, Rocky wrote: >>> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message >>> news:n5uu9l$th0$1@dont-email.me... >>>> On 29/12/2015 20:34, Rocky wrote: >>>>> "Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:n5ue1a$vhd$2@dont-email.me... >>>>>> On 29/12/2015 14:55, Rocky wrote: >>>>>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:rnp48blhio18pt9ljt17esj2tpgmm51btv@4ax.com... >>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:02:36 -0500, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In article <opp18bdamnfjcu77ret4mat6vstuceldde@4ax.com>, >>>>>>>>> compuelf@gmail.com says... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 16:29:40 -0500, "Bast" >>>>>>>>>> <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Not really,....but I don't really expect that you would >>>>>>>>>>>> understand >>>>>>>>>>>> basic common sense. >>>>>>>>>>>> And you have probably gotten used to that whistling sound by >>>>>>>>>>>> now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *** Whatever it is that ails you, Bastie, it's nothing that >>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't >>>>>>>>>>>> be fixed by a good horse fucking. Preferably against your >>>>>>>>>>>> strenuous objections. I bet you also make those adoring and >>>>>>>>>>>> apropos oinking noises as the Johnson does its work ... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Just because something works for YOU,....doesn't mean it will >>>>>>>>>>> work >>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>> anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Besides, I hear Mr Ed is still in therapy after you snuck into >>>>>>>>>>> his >>>>>>>>>>> stall, >>>>>>>>>>> and nailed the doors shut. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> While the neighbors heard a blood curdling,.... >>>>>>>>>>> "Willllllbbuuurrr, get this hagar outta here" >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Interesting. >>>>>>>>>> Do you experience bestiality fantasies a lot? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> One more symptom of her batshit craziness. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Her bestiality fantasies are certainly not normal. But so >>>>>>>> long >>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>> they remain fantasies, she's not causing any harm. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, it is clear that BKD and K are two living hijackers. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do tell what they have hijacked? >>>>> >>>>> This thread stupid. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> And we could find 19 more living suicide hijackers if the media did >>>>>>> better >>>>>>> work on finding out where the hijackers went after they names were >>>>>>> smeared >>>>>>> all over the place by the media. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So you want to know where they went after they died. >>>>> >>>>> ROTFLMAO because you think the scapegoats died? Hardly. >>>> >>>> Ehh, yes. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> And if they all the hijackers had been real people they could have all >>>>> lived >>>>> but some of the names were just made up so they never lived or died. >>>>> >>>>> Rocky >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> So if the hijackers were real, they would have lived after their plane >>>> crashed into the TT's, what a quaint idea. >>> >>> Why do you think it was a "quaint idea" >> >> Because of the reason I gave, which was what you posted. > > But what you saw never happened in real life and could not happen in real > life because the crash dynamics were missing. > Avoidance noted. > And never forget the reason all the videos of a jet ramming the South Tower > end so abruptly. It is because they didn't want to broadcast the explosions > necessary to cut the holes in the Twin Towers because the CGIs they used on > the Twin Towers could not do that themselves. DUH > > >>> when the videos themselves prove >>> that the jets in Nuke York City were consistent with CGIs that were >>> programmed to be reflective? And 3 different CGIs too. >>> >> >> Reflective CGI's, that's new. > > Not really because they were used on 9/11/01 you clown. > >>> In one case the disappearing wing reflects the South Tower and in another >>> case the disappearing wing reflects the sky. And real jets never have >>> disappearing wings. DUH >>> >>> Again, what you and millions of others saw on TV were just GGIs and there >>> was a lot of money paid out to get people to say "the plane", "the plane" >>> just like that guy on Fantasy Island because the jets in Nuke York City >>> really were just a fantasy brought to life by lies and CGIs. > > Rocky > > Oh I can't wait for your evidence of these people & how much money was involved. Awaiting one of your usual replies. I thought I would insert the part of my post you edited out (see above) --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-31 16:54 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <yd6dnZ5BqLQCLxjLnZ2dnUU7-budnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #542244 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:n63kr3$j62$2@pcls7.std.com... > "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes: > >>On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 01:48:28 -0800 (PST), joeturn <joeturn2@yahoo.com> >>wrote: > >>>Have you watched this Tummi Dragin? >>> >>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ > >> I've seen it. The unintentional comedy throughout it makes it the >>only reason to watch. > > We need to make a list of k00kvids worth watching for humor value (with > start times of the funny parts). > > We already know they have no factual content as Rocky proved they are all > lies. But some are really funny while others are boring, droning on and > on with their lies, sometimes for literally hours. You keep talking but you never offer any proof of what you say. Hmmm, you must have learned your SOP from the media because they did the exact same bullshit with 9/11. Fact remains NIST never even tried to explain why the Twin Towers left so much standing at the very bottom of them that should have been crushed if they really collapsed down to the ground. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg Hell, NIST wouldn't even address why the Twin Towers collapsed and you think they addressed what they did after they appeared to collapse to the ground. HA HA HA. All NIST ever did was come up with a "Collapse Initiation theory" that was proven to be total bullshit by people that knew the phrases that NIST was playing with. See: NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCuMULutHs&list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-01 06:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n656lf$c60$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #542537 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >news:n63kr3$j62$2@pcls7.std.com... >> >> We need to make a list of k00kvids worth watching for humor value (with >> start times of the funny parts). >> >> We already know they have no factual content as Rocky proved they are all >> lies. But some are really funny while others are boring, droning on and >> on with their lies, sometimes for literally hours. >You keep talking but you never offer any proof of what you say. I don't need to provide any proof that k00kvids are all lies with no factual content. You already proved that! No need for me to prove it again!! As to k00kvids being humorous, all you have to do is watch them! I still think the clip with that Russian kooktard being "interviewed" as if he was some sort of expert is one of the funniest out there. Or prove "literally hours"? Youtube provides a length of each video and there are quite a few k00kvids that are almost 4 hours long, or even longer. Any of them are "literally hours" long. BTW, Rocky, kooktards can make contributions to the list of funny kookvid clips. I figure kooktards have a huge advantage because they watched all those hours of droning lies so they got to see funny clips other people never got to see. On the other hand, they can't recognize the humor in those clips. But give it a try, anyway!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-01 00:40 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <9IydnagCc8grghvLnZ2dnUU7-dOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #542582 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message news:n656lf$c60$1@pcls7.std.com... > "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: > >>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message >>news:n63kr3$j62$2@pcls7.std.com... >>> >>> We need to make a list of k00kvids worth watching for humor value (with >>> start times of the funny parts). >>> >>> We already know they have no factual content as Rocky proved they are >>> all >>> lies. But some are really funny while others are boring, droning on and >>> on with their lies, sometimes for literally hours. > >>You keep talking but you never offer any proof of what you say. > > I don't need to provide any proof that k00kvids are all lies with no > factual content. You already proved that! No need for me to prove it > again!! > > As to k00kvids being humorous, all you have to do is watch them! I still > think the clip with that Russian kooktard being "interviewed" as if he was > some sort of expert is one of the funniest out there. > > Or prove "literally hours"? Youtube provides a length of each video and > there are quite a few k00kvids that are almost 4 hours long, or even > longer. Any of them are "literally hours" long. > > BTW, Rocky, kooktards can make contributions to the list of funny kookvid > clips. I figure kooktards have a huge advantage because they watched all > those hours of droning lies so they got to see funny clips other people > never got to see. On the other hand, they can't recognize the humor in > those clips. But give it a try, anyway! I'm still waiting for you to prove that a collapsing building should not crush the very bottom of the building and at the same time end up below what it failed to crush. http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg And while you are at it explain why what we saw fly into the Twin Towers can so easily be recreated by 3D software. Or why NIST used so much bullshit in their million dollar pieces of crap. See: NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence ><https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCuMULutHs&list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W>< Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-01 12:36 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <bphd8b1n800i1hq6ulsomo8pq0dt4lbqqo@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #542583 |
On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 00:40:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
[...]
>>>You keep talking but you never offer any proof of what you say.
>>
>> I don't need to provide any proof that k00kvids are all lies with no
>> factual content. You already proved that! No need for me to prove it
>> again!!
>>
>> As to k00kvids being humorous, all you have to do is watch them! I still
>> think the clip with that Russian kooktard being "interviewed" as if he was
>> some sort of expert is one of the funniest out there.
>>
>> Or prove "literally hours"? Youtube provides a length of each video and
>> there are quite a few k00kvids that are almost 4 hours long, or even
>> longer. Any of them are "literally hours" long.
>>
>> BTW, Rocky, kooktards can make contributions to the list of funny kookvid
>> clips. I figure kooktards have a huge advantage because they watched all
>> those hours of droning lies so they got to see funny clips other people
>> never got to see. On the other hand, they can't recognize the humor in
>> those clips. But give it a try, anyway!
>
>I'm still waiting for you to prove that a collapsing building should not
>crush the very bottom of the building and at the same time end up below what
>it failed to crush.
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>
What do you believe using an image that PROVES your claims wrong
gains you? I've asked this question of you many times, but you've
always lived up to your name of Run Away Roger rather than present an
answer.
>And while you are at it explain why what we saw fly into the Twin Towers can
>so easily be recreated by 3D software.
>
But you always claimed only one person could do it. If only one
person over the whole of the earth has/had the ability to do it, then
it can't be easy.
>Or why NIST used so much bullshit in their million dollar pieces of crap.
You've yet to offer any evidence that any bullshit was used.
Since you're lying, you can't. You can only run away from the truth.
"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 | 2016-01-03 07:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n6ah20$jku$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #542583 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes: >I'm still waiting for you to prove that a collapsing building should not >crush the very bottom of the building and at the same time end up below >what it failed to crush. Asked and answered. BTW I'm still waiting for you to provide actual proof for so many of your kookclaims, like another building(s) destroyed by nuclear demolition so I can see whether your favorite picture (the one with the kookscribbles) is "comparable to" it, your proof that the crater in Shanksville was there before 9/11, your proof the planes didn't slow down when they crashed into the towers even after I showed you that they did, and all the other proofs that Sarah E, Shill #3, Tony Dragon and others keep asking you but you just keep running away from. No wonder you've earned the nickname "Run Away Rocky".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-04 13:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n6drj8$bdn$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #542896 |
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes: >BTW I'm still waiting for you to provide actual proof for so many of your >kookclaims, like another building(s) destroyed by nuclear demolition so I >can see whether your favorite picture (the one with the kookscribbles) is >"comparable to" it, your proof that the crater in Shanksville was there >before 9/11, your proof the planes didn't slow down when they crashed into >the towers even after I showed you that they did, and all the other proofs >that Sarah E, Shill #3, Tony Dragon and others keep asking you but you >just keep running away from. No wonder you've earned the nickname "Run >Away Rocky". Hello? Kooktard? You there? Still running away, I see... <cue crickets yet again>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-01 12:36 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <0qhd8b518muepl9j584obo5gme75hambro@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #542537 |
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:54:35 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>news:n63kr3$j62$2@pcls7.std.com...
>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 01:48:28 -0800 (PST), joeturn <joeturn2@yahoo.com>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>Have you watched this Tummi Dragin?
>>>>
>>>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
>>
>>> I've seen it. The unintentional comedy throughout it makes it the
>>>only reason to watch.
>>
>> We need to make a list of k00kvids worth watching for humor value (with
>> start times of the funny parts).
>>
>> We already know they have no factual content as Rocky proved they are all
>> lies. But some are really funny while others are boring, droning on and
>> on with their lies, sometimes for literally hours.
>
>You keep talking but you never offer any proof of what you say.
Your "Duck Test" proved it.
>Hmmm, you
>must have learned your SOP from the media because they did the exact same
>bullshit with 9/11.
>
Do you really think projecting your behavior onto Michael is a
benefit? Serious question.
>Fact remains NIST never even tried to explain why the Twin Towers left so
>much standing at the very bottom of them that should have been crushed if
>they really collapsed down to the ground.
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>
This issue was already addressed. Your dishonesty has already
been exposed.
>Hell, NIST wouldn't even address why the Twin Towers collapsed and you think
>they addressed what they did after they appeared to collapse to the ground.
>HA HA HA.
Yet, they did address why they collapsed.
What do you believe you LIE gains you? Serious question.
>
>All NIST ever did was come up with a "Collapse Initiation theory" that was
>proven to be total bullshit by people that knew the phrases that NIST was
>playing with.
>
>See: NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCuMULutHs&list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
>
As you've already PROVED, via your "Duck Test," all 9/11 k00k
videos are lies. And you'll note that everyone who has chosen to
comment about the matter has accepted your proof of all 9/11 k00k vids
being lies.
Now run away from the TRUTH I've posted. You will live up to your
name of Run Away Roger, as you ALWAYS do.
"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 | 2015-12-29 17:47 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nr668blf6vth4r8ugvdm3v3evhdq4vb3j2@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #542183 |
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 16:34:05 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
[...]
>>>>> And we could find 19 more living suicide hijackers if the media did
>>>>> better
>>>>> work on finding out where the hijackers went after they names were
>>>>> smeared all over the place by the media.
>>>>
>>>> So you want to know where they went after they died.
>>>
>>> ROTFLMAO because you think the scapegoats died? Hardly.
>>
>> Ehh, yes.
>>
>>> And if they all the hijackers had been real people they could have all
>>> lived but some of the names were just made up so they never lived or died.
>>
>> So if the hijackers were real, they would have lived after their plane
>> crashed into the TT's, what a quaint idea.
>
>Why do you think it was a "quaint idea" when the videos themselves prove
>that the jets in Nuke York City were consistent with CGIs that were
>programmed to be reflective? And 3 different CGIs too.
Present other CGIs that we can use to compare to ensure the jets
in New York were/are consistent with CGIs.
>
>In one case the disappearing wing reflects the South Tower and in another
>case the disappearing wing reflects the sky. And real jets never have
>disappearing wings. DUH
>
Using the video you used to link to, I was able to PROVE no wings
disappeared. You ceased linking to the video after I did so.
>Again, what you and millions of others saw on TV were just GGIs and there
>was a lot of money paid out to get people to say "the plane", "the plane"
>just like that guy on Fantasy Island because the jets in Nuke York City
>really were just a fantasy brought to life by lies and CGIs.
Yet there is ZERO evidence for your claim.
You are, of course, free to present your evidence. Unless you're
lying. If that's the case, you'll only live up to your name of Run
Away Roger by either ignoring my request or playing an avoidance game.
"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 | 2015-12-29 17:47 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <iq668blva93gap92716tukvtneib9qb5f2@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #542161 |
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 14:34:04 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
[...]
>>>>>>> Besides, I hear Mr Ed is still in therapy after you snuck into his
>>>>>>> stall, and nailed the doors shut.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While the neighbors heard a blood curdling,....
>>>>>>> "Willllllbbuuurrr, get this hagar outta here"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Interesting.
>>>>>> Do you experience bestiality fantasies a lot?
>>>>>
>>>>> One more symptom of her batshit craziness.
>>>>
>>>> Her bestiality fantasies are certainly not normal. But so long as
>>>> they remain fantasies, she's not causing any harm.
>>>
>>> Well, it is clear that BKD and K are two living hijackers.
>>
>> Do tell what they have hijacked?
>
>This thread stupid.
>
So this mythical BKD person and I are Bast? As you can see above,
Bast is the one who felt compelled to share her bestiality fantasy.
>>> And we could find 19 more living suicide hijackers if the media did
>>> better
>>> work on finding out where the hijackers went after they names were
>>> smeared all over the place by the media.
>>>
>>
>> So you want to know where they went after they died.
>
>ROTFLMAO because you think the scapegoats died? Hardly.
>
>And if they all the hijackers had been real people they could have all lived
>but some of the names were just made up so they never lived or died.
But the hijackers died. You are, of course, free to prove they
didn't. Proving that people with the same name are alive will not be
accepted.
Now live up to your name of Run Away Roger. Either by ignoring my
post, or offering a means of avoidance. You must as you can't address
the truth.
"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 | 2015-12-29 17:46 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <5p668b52iu6s1g941io33td8bi8c03ktu4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #542090 |
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 08:55:50 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:rnp48blhio18pt9ljt17esj2tpgmm51btv@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 11:02:36 -0500, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <opp18bdamnfjcu77ret4mat6vstuceldde@4ax.com>,
>>>compuelf@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 16:29:40 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> >> Not really,....but I don't really expect that you would understand
>>>> >> basic common sense.
>>>> >> And you have probably gotten used to that whistling sound by now.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> *** Whatever it is that ails you, Bastie, it's nothing that couldn't
>>>> >> be fixed by a good horse fucking. Preferably against your
>>>> >> strenuous objections. I bet you also make those adoring and
>>>> >> apropos oinking noises as the Johnson does its work ...
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >Just because something works for YOU,....doesn't mean it will work for
>>>> >anyone else.
>>>> >
>>>> >Besides, I hear Mr Ed is still in therapy after you snuck into his
>>>> >stall,and nailed the doors shut.
>>>> >
>>>> >While the neighbors heard a blood curdling,....
>>>> >"Willllllbbuuurrr, get this hagar outta here"
>>>>
>>>> Interesting.
>>>> Do you experience bestiality fantasies a lot?
>>>
>>>One more symptom of her batshit craziness.
>>
>> Her bestiality fantasies are certainly not normal. But so long as
>> they remain fantasies, she's not causing any harm.
>
>Well, it is clear that BKD
Once more, who is this BKD person you so often mention? I've not
seen a post from anyone using that nym.
>and K are two living hijackers.
>
You certain do have some interesting delusions.
If you think Bast's fantasies are causing harm, please explain
how her fantasies are doing so. Of course, you can "run away" as you
almost always do.
>And we could find 19 more living suicide hijackers if the media did better
>work on finding out where the hijackers went after they names were smeared
>all over the place by the media.
Since they all died, finding them would prove a bit difficult
now.
But present your evidence that they aren't dead. Proving that
people who happen to have the same names are alive will not be
acceptable.
[Cue Run Away Roger living up to his name.]
"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 | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-23 12:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <uqml7bd5gu6buemu02kql6udm3qm1q1hvf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #541083 |
On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:50:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >"Hägar" <hsahm@yahoo.com> wrote in message >news:a-WdndGbspTrWOfLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com... >> "Rocky" wrote in message >> news:9J6dnaudOPo4J-fLnZ2dnUU7-fWdnZ2d@giganews.com... >> >> Heck with the "9/11 was an inside job" phrase because I think the "9/11 >> was >> a CGI job" phrase is much more informative. >> >> >> *** How about: Wockie is a Nut-Job ... >> has a nice ring to it, you Loon ... > >Too bad neither you or the other plane huggers here have a way to prove >those were real jets after they were taken out of good radar range. Are you trying to tell people planes in NYC and Washington/Virginia were out of radar range??? You are clinically insane Roger. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-23 14:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n5etj5$9u7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #541090 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:50:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> "Hägar" <hsahm@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:a-WdndGbspTrWOfLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>> "Rocky" wrote in message >>> news:9J6dnaudOPo4J-fLnZ2dnUU7-fWdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>> >>> Heck with the "9/11 was an inside job" phrase because I think the >>> "9/11 was >>> a CGI job" phrase is much more informative. >>> >>> >>> *** How about: Wockie is a Nut-Job ... >>> has a nice ring to it, you Loon ... >> >> Too bad neither you or the other plane huggers here have a way to prove >> those were real jets after they were taken out of good radar range. > > Are you trying to tell people planes in NYC and Washington/Virginia > were out of radar range??? > > You are clinically insane Roger. LOL No, he's not telling you that. The official 9/11 fairytale is telling you that. Ho-ho-ho
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-23 16:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bh3m7b5uf4kcj3musqcdu9s6r6smdg24jk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #541118 |
On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:47:10 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:50:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> "Hägar" <hsahm@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:a-WdndGbspTrWOfLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>>> "Rocky" wrote in message >>>> news:9J6dnaudOPo4J-fLnZ2dnUU7-fWdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>>> >>>> Heck with the "9/11 was an inside job" phrase because I think the >>>> "9/11 was >>>> a CGI job" phrase is much more informative. >>>> >>>> >>>> *** How about: Wockie is a Nut-Job ... >>>> has a nice ring to it, you Loon ... >>> >>> Too bad neither you or the other plane huggers here have a way to prove >>> those were real jets after they were taken out of good radar range. >> >> Are you trying to tell people planes in NYC and Washington/Virginia >> were out of radar range??? >> >> You are clinically insane Roger. LOL > > > > > >No, he's not telling you that. That is exactly what he is saying, you mental midget. >The official 9/11 fairytale is telling you that. The official truth of 9/11 says real planes were out of radar range in NYC and Washington/Virginia? WHOOOOSH. Got any cites for your latest construct? >Ho-ho-ho >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-23 21:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n5fljr$sp4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #541144 |
Sarah Ehrett wrote: > On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:47:10 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> >> >> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:50:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> "Hägar" <hsahm@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>> news:a-WdndGbspTrWOfLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>>>> "Rocky" wrote in message >>>>> news:9J6dnaudOPo4J-fLnZ2dnUU7-fWdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>>>> >>>>> Heck with the "9/11 was an inside job" phrase because I think the >>>>> "9/11 was >>>>> a CGI job" phrase is much more informative. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *** How about: Wockie is a Nut-Job ... >>>>> has a nice ring to it, you Loon ... >>>> >>>> Too bad neither you or the other plane huggers here have a way to >>>> prove those were real jets after they were taken out of good radar >>>> range. >>> >>> Are you trying to tell people planes in NYC and Washington/Virginia >>> were out of radar range??? >>> >>> You are clinically insane Roger. LOL >> >> >> >> >> >> No, he's not telling you that. > > That is exactly what he is saying, you mental midget. > >> The official 9/11 fairytale is telling you that. > > The official truth of 9/11 says real planes were out of radar range in > NYC and Washington/Virginia? > > WHOOOOSH. Got any cites for your latest construct? > >> Ho-ho-ho Yes I have cites,....the "official 9/11 report" You should at least READ the bible you claim to believe in. If for nothing else, just for the laughs of 9/11 physics. Ho-ho-ho
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-24 00:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <r91n7b9rtep2s4g17n4ram1kogiedqtfdu@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #541197 |
On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 21:37:08 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > >Sarah Ehrett wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:47:10 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Sarah Ehrett wrote: >>>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:50:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Hägar" <hsahm@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:a-WdndGbspTrWOfLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>>>>> "Rocky" wrote in message >>>>>> news:9J6dnaudOPo4J-fLnZ2dnUU7-fWdnZ2d@giganews.com... >>>>>> >>>>>> Heck with the "9/11 was an inside job" phrase because I think the >>>>>> "9/11 was >>>>>> a CGI job" phrase is much more informative. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *** How about: Wockie is a Nut-Job ... >>>>>> has a nice ring to it, you Loon ... >>>>> >>>>> Too bad neither you or the other plane huggers here have a way to >>>>> prove those were real jets after they were taken out of good radar >>>>> range. >>>> >>>> Are you trying to tell people planes in NYC and Washington/Virginia >>>> were out of radar range??? >>>> >>>> You are clinically insane Roger. LOL >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> No, he's not telling you that. >> >> That is exactly what he is saying, you mental midget. >> >>> The official 9/11 fairytale is telling you that. >> >> The official truth of 9/11 says real planes were out of radar range in >> NYC and Washington/Virginia? >> >> WHOOOOSH. Got any cites for your latest construct? >> >>> Ho-ho-ho > > > > > >Yes I have cites,....the "official 9/11 report" The truth does not say on 9/11 real planes were out of radar range in NYC and Washington/Virginia. Just the contrary since the all stop on air travel made every radar in the US tracking everything that moved. But do go ahead and show me where you claim it was said.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-24 03:57 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <0bgn7bdvka168nvumtpn4s80ho5tj8o9qc@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #541197 |
On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 21:37:08 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:47:10 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:50:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Hägar" <hsahm@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:a-WdndGbspTrWOfLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>> "Rocky" wrote in message
>>>>>> news:9J6dnaudOPo4J-fLnZ2dnUU7-fWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heck with the "9/11 was an inside job" phrase because I think the
>>>>>> "9/11 was
>>>>>> a CGI job" phrase is much more informative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** How about: Wockie is a Nut-Job ...
>>>>>> has a nice ring to it, you Loon ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Too bad neither you or the other plane huggers here have a way to
>>>>> prove those were real jets after they were taken out of good radar
>>>>> range.
>>>>
>>>> Are you trying to tell people planes in NYC and Washington/Virginia
>>>> were out of radar range???
>>>>
>>>> You are clinically insane Roger. LOL
>>>
>>>
>>> No, he's not telling you that.
>>
>> That is exactly what he is saying, you mental midget.
>>
>>> The official 9/11 fairytale is telling you that.
>>
>> The official truth of 9/11 says real planes were out of radar range in
>> NYC and Washington/Virginia?
>>
>> WHOOOOSH. Got any cites for your latest construct?
>>
>>> Ho-ho-ho
>
>
>Yes I have cites,....the "official 9/11 report"
I've read it. I don't recall a claim that any planes were out of
radar range being made. If, as you claim, this is within the report,
please tell me where. I'll look it up.
>You should at least READ the bible you claim to believe in.
>
I have no idea if Sarah reads the Bible. I don't recall her
making mention of it. Not that it matters. I doubt 9/11 has any
mention in the Bible.
>If for nothing else, just for the laughs of 9/11 physics.
>
>Ho-ho-ho
That you're a whore is something you should keep to yourself.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-24 03:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n5fo6r$grs$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #541083 |
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>BTW first the Jews went after
^^^^^^^^
That answers A LOT of questions....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-24 03:56 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <q9gn7bp440dng1rla4dt449358m4483vm3@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #541083 |
On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:50:01 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>"Hägar" <hsahm@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:a-WdndGbspTrWOfLnZ2dnUU7-SOdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> "Rocky" wrote in message
>> news:9J6dnaudOPo4J-fLnZ2dnUU7-fWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>> Heck with the "9/11 was an inside job" phrase because I think the "9/11
>> was
>> a CGI job" phrase is much more informative.
>>
>>
>> *** How about: Wockie is a Nut-Job ...
>> has a nice ring to it, you Loon ...
>
>Too bad neither you or the other plane huggers here have a way to prove
>those were real jets after they were taken out of good radar range.
>
>BTW first the Jews went after the Twin Towers with CGIs and now they are
>planning to go after Christmas too. See: "How Putin Celebrates Christmas"
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWqK7yxgvE
>
Is there any mentally unsound person you will not believe? Any at
all?
Serious question.
"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 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web