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


Groups > sci.physics > #542734 > unrolled thread

3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence

Started by"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
First post2016-01-02 00:48 -0600
Last post2016-01-04 04:04 -0600
Articles 20 on this page of 23 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence  "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-02 00:48 -0600
    Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 06:08 -0600
      Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-02 07:43 -0600
        Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-02 17:22 +0000
        Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 12:46 -0600
          Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-03 15:28 -0600
            Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-03 22:47 +0000
              Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-04 12:57 +0000
                Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-04 09:43 -0600
                  Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-04 16:33 +0000
                  Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 04:00 -0600
                    Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-07 09:06 -0600
                      Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 20:05 -0600
                        Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-08 08:44 -0600
                          Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-01-08 14:32 -0500
                            Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-01-08 17:15 -0600
                              Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-08 23:25 +0000
                              Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 05:38 -0600
                              Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-01-09 07:46 -0500
                              Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-09 14:50 +0000
                            Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 05:35 -0600
                          Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 05:35 -0600
            Re: 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 04:04 -0600

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →


#542734 — 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2016-01-02 00:48 -0600
Subject3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable Evidence
Message-ID<Q4WdnS_GFvTP7hrLnZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable 
Evidence
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o

Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#542749

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-02 06:08 -0600
Message-ID<scff8bt1sk7ei85e0bq3s7dn9107l9dukd@4ax.com>
In reply to#542734
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 00:48:53 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable 
>Evidence
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>

     Whereas your duck test has PROVED all 9/11 k00k vids are lies, we
must presume this one is as well.
     I especially like how the person who made the video proves the
first witness wrong about the plane having propellers. After the
witness' comments, the video shows a slowed down shot of the second
plane. You'll not the completely absence of propellers. Two jet
engines are easily visible.
     Once again you PROVE real, true to life passenger jets were used
by the terrorists.
     Keep up the good work, Run Away Roger. It is possible that your
work to prove 9/11 was NOT an inside job may bear fruit.

>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us 
>

     Since most accept that they media did not lie, I guess you're
only wishing a happy new year to the 9/11 k00ks.


"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]


#542773

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2016-01-02 07:43 -0600
Message-ID<n6CdnVTCU5XqSRrLnZ2dnUU7-W2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#542749
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:scff8bt1sk7ei85e0bq3s7dn9107l9dukd@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 00:48:53 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable
>>Evidence
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>
>
>     Whereas your duck test has PROVED all 9/11 k00k vids are lies, we
> must presume this one is as well.

Too bad Michael proved the jets in Nuke York City where CGIs for me because 
the jets and the CGIs went into the Twin Towers at the exact same speed.

Now that you know your so call proof has proven CGIs were used in Nuke York 
City you might want to rethink using anything Michael says.  <G>

BTW you really should watch the above video and then comment on it since 
that is the subject of this thread.  <G>

Rocky 

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


#542802

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-01-02 17:22 +0000
Message-ID<n6910j$g7s$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#542773
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:scff8bt1sk7ei85e0bq3s7dn9107l9dukd@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 00:48:53 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable
>>>Evidence
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>
>>
>>     Whereas your duck test has PROVED all 9/11 k00k vids are lies, we
>> must presume this one is as well.

>Too bad Michael proved the jets in Nuke York City where CGIs for me because 
>the jets and the CGIs went into the Twin Towers at the exact same speed.

So there were both jets AND CGIs that went into the buildings?  I never
considered that possibility.  But at least you now admit that jets flew
into the buildings.

>BTW you really should watch the above video and then comment on it since 
>that is the subject of this thread.  <G>

But since we know all kookvids are lies, and you claim that kookvid proves
irrefutable evidence that 9/11 was an inside job/conspiracy, we know for a
fact that 9/11 could not be an inside job.  All without even watching it!
Thanks, Rocky, for the proof that 9/11 was not an inside job or a
conspiracy!

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


#542821

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-02 12:46 -0600
Message-ID<hk6g8b18vquifqefjr85v95b316p39rp53@4ax.com>
In reply to#542773
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 07:43:21 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:scff8bt1sk7ei85e0bq3s7dn9107l9dukd@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 00:48:53 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable
>>>Evidence
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>
>>     Whereas your duck test has PROVED all 9/11 k00k vids are lies, we
>> must presume this one is as well.
>
>Too bad Michael proved the jets in Nuke York City where CGIs for me because 
>the jets and the CGIs went into the Twin Towers at the exact same speed.
>

     I've not seen a post from him wherein he state both jets hit at
the exact same speed. 
     You will post the quote and MID (in the PROPER format) for
Michael's proving your claims, unless you're lying. If your claim is a
lie, you won't because you can't.
     And I think you're flat out lying about both jets and CGIs
hitting the building (though I appreciate that you're finally
admitting there were jets).
     I await your means of running away from the truth.

>Now that you know your so call proof has proven CGIs were used in Nuke York 
>City you might want to rethink using anything Michael says.  <G>

     But your current claim is CGIs AND jets. Of course no CGIs were
used. You've helped to prove this.
     I'll post the MIDs for a few of the posts wherein you did as I
claim, if you'd like. I will, of course, post them in the proper
format, since I have the intellect to follow established Usenet
standards.

>
>BTW you really should watch the above video and then comment on it since 
>that is the subject of this thread.  <G>

     I've watched. I commented on how the claim of the first witness
to appear on the video was proved wrong right after his segment was
done.
     He claimed the plane had propellers. The video shows the second
plane. It did not have propellers. It did have two jet engines.
     You've left yourself only two options, as far as I can see.
Either the man was wrong, or you are. If the man is wrong, then the
use of him in the video invalidates the whole of the video.
     If you are wrong, then your use of the video invalidates your
whole claim.
     If you see a realistic option that I've missed, present it. But
you won't. You'll live up to your name of Run Away Roger by either
refusing to answer this post, 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]


#542974

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2016-01-03 15:28 -0600
Message-ID<0OSdndarsatgDxTLnZ2dnUU7-LWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#542821
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:hk6g8b18vquifqefjr85v95b316p39rp53@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 07:43:21 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:scff8bt1sk7ei85e0bq3s7dn9107l9dukd@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 00:48:53 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job - New Irrefutable
>>>>Evidence
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>
>>>     Whereas your duck test has PROVED all 9/11 k00k vids are lies, we
>>> must presume this one is as well.
>>
>>Too bad Michael proved the jets in Nuke York City where CGIs for me 
>>because
>>the jets and the CGIs went into the Twin Towers at the exact same speed.
>>
>
>     I've not seen a post from him wherein he state both jets hit at
> the exact same speed.
>     You will post the quote and MID (in the PROPER format) for
> Michael's proving your claims, unless you're lying. If your claim is a
> lie, you won't because you can't.
>     And I think you're flat out lying about both jets and CGIs
> hitting the building (though I appreciate that you're finally
> admitting there were jets).
>     I await your means of running away from the truth.
>
>>Now that you know your so call proof has proven CGIs were used in Nuke 
>>York
>>City you might want to rethink using anything Michael says.  <G>
>
>     But your current claim is CGIs AND jets. Of course no CGIs were
> used. You've helped to prove this.
>     I'll post the MIDs for a few of the posts wherein you did as I
> claim, if you'd like. I will, of course, post them in the proper
> format, since I have the intellect to follow established Usenet
> standards.
>
>>
>>BTW you really should watch the above video and then comment on it since
>>that is the subject of this thread.  <G>
>
>     I've watched. I commented on how the claim of the first witness
> to appear on the video was proved wrong right after his segment was
> done.
>     He claimed the plane had propellers. The video shows the second
> plane. It did not have propellers. It did have two jet engines.
>     You've left yourself only two options, as far as I can see.
> Either the man was wrong, or you are. If the man is wrong, then the
> use of him in the video invalidates the whole of the video.
>     If you are wrong, then your use of the video invalidates your
> whole claim.
>     If you see a realistic option that I've missed, present it. But
> you won't. You'll live up to your name of Run Away Roger by either
> refusing to answer this post, or playing an avoidance game.

Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the 
engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.

Better watch more of the above video this time.

Rocky 

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


#542978

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-01-03 22:47 +0000
Message-ID<n6c8dl$54v$3@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#542974
Rocky wrote:

>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the
>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.

It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.

Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you would
have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.

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


#543039

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-01-04 12:57 +0000
Message-ID<n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#542978
moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:

>Rocky wrote:

>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the
>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.

>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.

>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you would
>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.

Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?

<crickets chirp>

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


#543053

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2016-01-04 09:43 -0600
Message-ID<VZCdnbBCF-MQDhfLnZ2dnUU7-LmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#543039
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>
>>Rocky wrote:
>
>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the
>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>
>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>
>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you would
>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.
>
> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>
> <crickets chirp>

ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the 
official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next to 
none.

Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that supports 
your story about 9/11.  <G>

And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one 
because that would be amazing.

Now back to the OP that follows:

3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
 New Irrefutable Evidence
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o

Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us


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


#543062

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-01-04 16:33 +0000
Message-ID<n6e6s7$bg2$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#543053
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>
>>>Rocky wrote:
>>
>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the
>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>
>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>
>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you would
>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.
>>
>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>
>> <crickets chirp>

>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the 
>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next to 
>none.

*STILL* no proof the engine part couldn't have come from Flight 175?

Run away, Rocky!!

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


#543217

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-05 04:00 -0600
Message-ID<025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com>
In reply to#543053
On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>
>>>Rocky wrote:
>>
>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the
>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>
>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>
>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you would
>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.
>>
>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>
>> <crickets chirp>
>
>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the 
>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next to 
>none.
>
>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that supports 
>your story about 9/11.  <G>
>
>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one 
>because that would be amazing.
>
>Now back to the OP that follows:
>
>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
> New Irrefutable Evidence
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>
>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us

     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can 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]


#543653

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2016-01-07 09:06 -0600
Message-ID<hPadnSRTqr8y4xPLnZ2dnUU7-bmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#543217
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>
>>>>Rocky wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the
>>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>
>>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>
>>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you would
>>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.
>>>
>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>
>>> <crickets chirp>
>>
>>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next to
>>none.
>>
>>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that 
>>supports
>>your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>
>>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>because that would be amazing.
>>
>>Now back to the OP that follows:
>>
>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>
>>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>
>     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.

Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government have 
against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO

Rocky 

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


#543791

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-07 20:05 -0600
Message-ID<9b6u8bd36kkqfr9j6euct34ffdekntnger@4ax.com>
In reply to#543653
On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:06:18 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>>
>>>>>Rocky wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why the
>>>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>>
>>>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>>
>>>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you would
>>>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.
>>>>
>>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>>
>>>> <crickets chirp>
>>>
>>>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next to
>>>none.
>>>
>>>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that 
>>>supports your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>>
>>>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>>because that would be amazing.
>>>
>>>Now back to the OP that follows:
>>>
>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>
>>>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>>
>>     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.
>
>Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government have 
>against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO
>

     What does this have to do with the engine being from flight 175?
     Don't you get tired of running away?


"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]


#543845

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2016-01-08 08:44 -0600
Message-ID<VMadnRICku8nVhLLnZ2dnUU7-QednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#543791
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:9b6u8bd36kkqfr9j6euct34ffdekntnger@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:06:18 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Rocky wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why 
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>>>
>>>>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you 
>>>>>>would
>>>>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>>>
>>>>> <crickets chirp>
>>>>
>>>>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>>>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next to
>>>>none.
>>>>
>>>>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that
>>>>supports your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>>>
>>>>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>>>because that would be amazing.
>>>>
>>>>Now back to the OP that follows:
>>>>
>>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>>>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>>
>>>>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>>>
>>>     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.
>>
>>Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government have
>>against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO
>>
>
>     What

Look who is running away now K.  It is you.  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 

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


#543870

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2016-01-08 14:32 -0500
Message-ID<0j309b9lbrho8a113ttakijcair8048ogh@4ax.com>
In reply to#543845
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:44:17 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:9b6u8bd36kkqfr9j6euct34ffdekntnger@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:06:18 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Rocky wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why 
>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you 
>>>>>>>would
>>>>>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a k00kvid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <crickets chirp>
>>>>>
>>>>>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>>>>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next to
>>>>>none.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that
>>>>>supports your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>>>>
>>>>>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>>>>because that would be amazing.
>>>>>
>>>>>Now back to the OP that follows:
>>>>>
>>>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>>>>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>>>
>>>>>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>>>>
>>>>     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.
>>>
>>>Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government have
>>>against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO
>>>
>>
>>     What does this have to do with the engine being from flight 175?
>>     Don't you get tired of running away?

>
>Look who is running away now K.  

YOU AGAIN, YOU STILL,  Run Away Roger.   Try answering K Wills
question.  



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


#543911

From"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net>
Date2016-01-08 17:15 -0600
Message-ID<K92dnV4ST4UE3g3LnZ2dnUU7-dGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#543870
"Sarah Ehrett" <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote in message 
news:0j309b9lbrho8a113ttakijcair8048ogh@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:44:17 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:9b6u8bd36kkqfr9j6euct34ffdekntnger@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:06:18 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Rocky wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why
>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you
>>>>>>>>would
>>>>>>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a 
>>>>>>>>k00kvid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <crickets chirp>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>>>>>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next 
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>none.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that
>>>>>>supports your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>>>>>because that would be amazing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now back to the OP that follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>>>>>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>>>>>
>>>>>     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.
>>>>
>>>>Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government 
>>>>have
>>>>against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO
>>>>
>>>
>>>     What does this have to do with the engine being from flight 175?
>>>     Don't you get tired of running away?
>
>>
>>Look who is running away now K.
>
> YOU AGAIN, YOU STILL,  Run Away Roger.   Try answering K Wills
> question.

If he can't tell me what the evidence is against the alleged hijackers what 
good is he?  And look at how bad you failed at that same question.

I can't help you if  you can't help yourself.  DUH

Rocky 

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


#543913

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-01-08 23:25 +0000
Message-ID<n6pggm$ema$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#543911
"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:


>"Sarah Ehrett" <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote in message 
>news:0j309b9lbrho8a113ttakijcair8048ogh@4ax.com...

>>>Look who is running away now K.
>>
>> YOU AGAIN, YOU STILL,  Run Away Roger.   Try answering K Wills
>> question.

>If he can't tell me what the evidence is against the alleged hijackers what 
>good is he?  And look at how bad you failed at that same question.

>I can't help you if  you can't help yourself.  DUH

How about answering the question?

How about answering _my_ questions?!?!?!

Or will you just run away again? 

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


#543985

From"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-09 05:38 -0600
Message-ID<m9s19b58g22jdta0s6689kqv20838o4p11@4ax.com>
In reply to#543911
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 17:15:42 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote in message 
>news:0j309b9lbrho8a113ttakijcair8048ogh@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:44:17 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:9b6u8bd36kkqfr9j6euct34ffdekntnger@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:06:18 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Rocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why
>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you
>>>>>>>>>would have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a 
>>>>>>>>>k00kvid.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <crickets chirp>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>>>>>>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next 
>>>>>>>to none.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that
>>>>>>>supports your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>>>>>>because that would be amazing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Now back to the OP that follows:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>>>>>>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.
>>>>>
>>>>>Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government 
>>>>>have against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO
>>>>
>>>>     What does this have to do with the engine being from flight 175?
>>>>     Don't you get tired of running away?
>>>
>>>Look who is running away now K.
>>
>> YOU AGAIN, YOU STILL,  Run Away Roger.   Try answering K Wills
>> question.
>
>If he can't tell me what the evidence is against the alleged hijackers what 
>good is he?  

     That's not the issue being discussed. Your claim that the turbine
did not come from flight 175 is. You are trying to run away from this.
But I'm not letting you.
     You'll have to run away from the matter entirely. 

>And look at how bad you failed at that same question.
>

     I've not been asked about the turbine.

>I can't help you if  you can't help yourself.  DUH

     All you are able to do is run away from the truth. You prove it
with ever post you send.


"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]


#543990

FromSarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net>
Date2016-01-09 07:46 -0500
Message-ID<j8029bljio71h8hh7c7mtq0af79u4m52p9@4ax.com>
In reply to#543911
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 17:15:42 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote in message 
>news:0j309b9lbrho8a113ttakijcair8048ogh@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:44:17 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:9b6u8bd36kkqfr9j6euct34ffdekntnger@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:06:18 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Rocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why
>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you
>>>>>>>>>would
>>>>>>>>>have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a 
>>>>>>>>>k00kvid.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <crickets chirp>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>>>>>>official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next 
>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>none.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that
>>>>>>>supports your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>>>>>>because that would be amazing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Now back to the OP that follows:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>>>>>>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.
>>>>>
>>>>>Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government 
>>>>>have
>>>>>against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     What does this have to do with the engine being from flight 175?
>>>>     Don't you get tired of running away?
>>
>>>
>>>Look who is running away now K.
>>
>> YOU AGAIN, YOU STILL,  Run Away Roger.   Try answering K Wills
>> question.
>
>If he can't tell me 

so you refuse to answer the question.  Another example of Run Away
Roger running away from the truth.

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


#544005

FromTony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com>
Date2016-01-09 14:50 +0000
Message-ID<n6r6i6$c53$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#543911
On 08/01/2016 23:15, Rocky wrote:
> "Sarah Ehrett" <ninety7gt@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:0j309b9lbrho8a113ttakijcair8048ogh@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:44:17 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9b6u8bd36kkqfr9j6euct34ffdekntnger@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:06:18 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:025n8bp5ab60oafk5q77ns3lpp0d2ec39q@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:43:27 -0600, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:n6dq8c$sqd$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>>>> moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rocky wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Wow that is a lot of rambling for someone that can't comment on why
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> engine found in Nuke York City could not have come from Flight 175.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It was part of the engine turbine.  The center part.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course if you actually had proof it wasn't from Flight 175, you
>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>> have posted it.  You would have posted actual evidence, not a
>>>>>>>>> k00kvid.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello?  Roger?  You there?  Are you are still running away?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <crickets chirp>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ROTFLMAO because the real "KOOK videos" would be trying to support the
>>>>>>> official story of 9/11 and that is why there are either none or next
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> none.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here, just for the hell of it try to find one video on youtube that
>>>>>>> supports your story about 9/11.  <G>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And you might as well start a brand new thread when or if you find one
>>>>>>> because that would be amazing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now back to the OP that follows:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3 Ways You Can PROVE 9/11 WTC Conspiracy/Inside Job -
>>>>>>> New Irrefutable Evidence
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGHg1bQk9-o
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rocky + Happy New Year to those that know the media has lied to us
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      Keep running away from the TRUTH, Roger. It's all you can do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, if you are so smart then what video evidence does our government
>>>>> have
>>>>> against the alleged hijackers?  ROTFLMAO
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      What does this have to do with the engine being from flight 175?
>>>>      Don't you get tired of running away?
>>
>>>
>>> Look who is running away now K.
>>
>> YOU AGAIN, YOU STILL,  Run Away Roger.   Try answering K Wills
>> question.
>
> If he can't tell me what the evidence is against the alleged hijackers what
> good is he?  And look at how bad you failed at that same question.
>
> I can't help you if  you can't help yourself.  DUH
>
> Rocky
>
>

Evasion noted.

Answer the question.


If you can't answer it must prove your failure.

Keep running


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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


Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web