Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #573362 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-26 04:54 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-04-30 14:49 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 139 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 04:54 -0700
Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 05:04 -0700
Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 05:16 -0700
Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 05:31 -0700
Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 06:05 -0700
Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 06:11 -0700
Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 07:36 -0700
Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 07:52 -0700
Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 07:38 -0700
Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:00 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:07 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:13 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:21 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:28 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:40 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 12:48 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 11:54 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:06 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 14:39 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 12:08 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 14:17 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 12:13 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:08 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-26 19:42 +0000
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 13:50 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-26 21:31 +0000
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:04 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:12 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:16 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:23 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 13:53 +0000
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 07:16 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 09:22 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 14:55 +0000
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 10:17 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:19 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 10:23 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:33 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 11:08 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 13:35 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:48 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:47 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 16:03 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 22:20 +0000
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 19:36 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 18:36 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:43 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 19:38 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 19:37 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 23:16 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 09:32 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 16:06 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 15:59 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:48 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 17:06 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 17:48 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 23:05 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 06:00 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 06:18 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 07:42 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-28 22:43 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 06:00 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 09:55 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 07:55 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 13:14 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 14:20 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 14:44 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 16:20 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:27 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:27 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 21:40 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 02:24 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 04:37 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:21 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 09:57 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 10:28 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? "Pom Trotter" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-04-30 13:55 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 13:32 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-02 17:14 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 15:49 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-04 03:59 -0500
Re: A rancher hates "townies" for being too hip, too worldly. ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-04 04:51 -0500
Re: A rancher hates "townies" for being too hip, too worldly. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-04 08:24 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-04 08:25 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-04 12:51 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-04 19:25 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-04 21:37 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 05:53 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 06:08 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 06:43 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 06:57 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:47 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 10:08 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 13:35 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:43 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 23:47 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 10:32 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:56 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 13:38 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:24 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 23:53 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 21:03 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 01:59 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 02:04 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 02:04 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:14 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 12:01 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-28 15:17 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 15:46 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-28 23:26 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 02:11 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 09:44 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 07:07 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:47 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 04:32 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:18 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 09:48 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 13:16 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 10:31 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 14:01 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-05-03 09:19 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-05-03 14:26 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 14:13 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 17:30 +0000
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:45 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 12:39 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 06:10 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 09:58 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:23 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 23:50 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:33 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:34 -0500
Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:26 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 11:40 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:48 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 12:40 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:29 -0700
Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 21:19 -0400
Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 14:49 -0700
Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 12:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5c5866f5-b58b-4928-9f77-162b5d65972e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573758 |
HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. Who else did?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 15:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nfr8gt$s1s$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #573774 |
On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: > HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. > Who else did? > Lots of people. Here's the sequence of events: 8:13 -- Flight 11 doesn't respond to air traffic control instructions, and suspicions about a hijacking begins. 8:20 -- Bush's morning briefing ends, and he prepares to leave his overnight hotel. 8:31 -- Flight 11 makes a major course correction and heads toward NYC. Somewhere between 8:30 and 8:39 -- Bush starts motorcade from hotel to Booker Elementary, a 20 minute ride in a fully electronically equipped presidential limo. 8:42 -- Flight 175 makes a major midcourse correction 8:43 -- NORAD notified of Flight 11 and 175 hijacking 8:46 -- Flight 77 starts to go off course. 8:46 -- Flight 11 crashes into the WTC 8:48 -- News reports start airing Between 8:55 and 8:58 -- Bush arrives at Booker Elementary. Local reporters at the school are already hearing about the reports of the first crash. 9:00 -- Bush takes a call from C Rice about the first airplane strike. 9:03 -- Flight 175 crashes into the WTC 9:05 -- Andrew Card whispers to Bush about the second crash and says it's an attack. 9:12 -- Bush leaves Booker Elementary 9:16 -- Flight 93 shows signs of being hijacked. Now, what about this timeline gives you the heebie-jeebies? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 16:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nfr9f1$tk5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #573774 |
On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: > HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. > Who else did? > I don't know where you were when the airplanes hit the WTC. I don't know if you remember clearly where you were. I know where I was. I was in a bagel shop, having breakfast and a discussion with some friends. The TV was on. Another friend was working behind the counter. At about 10 minutes before the hour, the friend behind the counter refreshed our coffee and said, "News is saying a plane hit the World Trade Center." We said, "What, really?" And the friend said, "The building's on fire and it's on TV. They're saying it may have been a small two-engine prop plane." And we kept on talking for a while, but the news started to get our attention. By the top of the hour we had stopped talking and were listening to the news. Three minutes later, we saw the second plane, obviously an airliner, hit the WTC. Now, what were the news people telling YOU when this happened, John? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 22:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nfrdv4$1um$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #573793 |
Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> writes: >On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: >> HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. >> Who else did? >> >I don't know where you were when the airplanes hit the WTC. I don't know >if you remember clearly where you were. >I know where I was. I was in a bagel shop, having breakfast and a ... I think John is saying how, some time after the attack, Bush said he saw the first plane hit on TV. But that guy permanently had his foot in his mouth so I never put any weight in fine details of what he said. He was probably talking how he saw the second plane hit, he probably was shown that video as soon as he got into his limo leaving the school or shortly after. He wouldn't have seen either plane live, when the first plane hit he was enroute to the school and when the second plane hit he was in the classroom. He may also been talking about later seeing the first plane hitting video, it came out after about 24 hours I think.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 19:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nfrlu8$1e7b$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #573809 |
On 4/27/2016 5:20 PM, Michael Moroney wrote: > Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> writes: > >> On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: >>> HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. >>> Who else did? >>> > >> I don't know where you were when the airplanes hit the WTC. I don't know >> if you remember clearly where you were. > >> I know where I was. I was in a bagel shop, having breakfast and a > ... > > I think John is saying how, some time after the attack, Bush said he saw > the first plane hit on TV. But that guy permanently had his foot in his > mouth so I never put any weight in fine details of what he said. He was > probably talking how he saw the second plane hit, he probably was shown > that video as soon as he got into his limo leaving the school or shortly > after. He wouldn't have seen either plane live, when the first plane hit > he was enroute to the school and when the second plane hit he was in the > classroom. > > He may also been talking about later seeing the first plane hitting video, > it came out after about 24 hours I think. > Bush had the mental chops of a dust bunny. Condy Rice was fully aware of what the situation was when she called him right at 9. There are reports that he thought it was an accident, not an attack, and it wasn't until he was explicitly told by Card that it was an attack that it began to soak in. Unfortunately, one of his advisers in the back of the room held up a sheet of paper with large block lettering that said, "Don't say anything yet," which gave Bush the chance to stew on it some more about what he should do. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobodyxx@gmail> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 18:36 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57213ef6$0$43741$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #573793 |
On 04/27/2016 05:03 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: >> HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. >> Who else did? >> > > I don't know where you were when the airplanes hit the WTC. I don't know > if you remember clearly where you were. > > I know where I was. I was in a bagel shop, having breakfast and a > discussion with some friends. The TV was on. Another friend was working > behind the counter. At about 10 minutes before the hour, the friend > behind the counter refreshed our coffee and said, "News is saying a > plane hit the World Trade Center." We said, "What, really?" And the > friend said, "The building's on fire and it's on TV. They're saying it > may have been a small two-engine prop plane." And we kept on talking for > a while, but the news started to get our attention. By the top of the > hour we had stopped talking and were listening to the news. Three > minutes later, we saw the second plane, obviously an airliner, hit the WTC. > > Now, what were the news people telling YOU when this happened, John? Remember John, that "journalists" and media people NEVER LIE! You can take anything they say as Gospel!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 15:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d3ac8bf7-0b82-4193-bbfd-ed44502bce97@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573810 |
Well, I've seen the video. A little girl asked him about HIS FIRST THOUGHTS and he said, basically, "When I saw the first plane hit on TV, before going into the classroom, I thought, 'There's a terrible pilot!' " Aw, what a sweet guy!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 19:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nfrm1s$1e7b$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #573813 |
On 4/27/2016 5:43 PM, john wrote: > Well, I've seen the video. > A little girl asked him about > HIS FIRST THOUGHTS > and he said, basically, "When I saw the > first plane hit on TV, > before going into the classroom, > I thought, 'There's a terrible pilot!' " > > Aw, what a sweet guy! > Dumb as a post. What's your point? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 19:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nfrm00$1e7b$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #573810 |
On 4/27/2016 5:36 PM, benj wrote: > On 04/27/2016 05:03 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: >>> HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. >>> Who else did? >>> >> >> I don't know where you were when the airplanes hit the WTC. I don't know >> if you remember clearly where you were. >> >> I know where I was. I was in a bagel shop, having breakfast and a >> discussion with some friends. The TV was on. Another friend was working >> behind the counter. At about 10 minutes before the hour, the friend >> behind the counter refreshed our coffee and said, "News is saying a >> plane hit the World Trade Center." We said, "What, really?" And the >> friend said, "The building's on fire and it's on TV. They're saying it >> may have been a small two-engine prop plane." And we kept on talking for >> a while, but the news started to get our attention. By the top of the >> hour we had stopped talking and were listening to the news. Three >> minutes later, we saw the second plane, obviously an airliner, hit the >> WTC. >> >> Now, what were the news people telling YOU when this happened, John? > > Remember John, that "journalists" and media people NEVER LIE! You can > take anything they say as Gospel! > They've been known to lie, and they've certainly been known to make mistakes. This doesn't mean everything they say is false. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobodyxx@gmail> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 23:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <572180a9$0$16695$c3e8da3$76a7c58f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #573832 |
On 04/27/2016 08:37 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/27/2016 5:36 PM, benj wrote: >> On 04/27/2016 05:03 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: >>>> HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. >>>> Who else did? >>>> >>> >>> I don't know where you were when the airplanes hit the WTC. I don't know >>> if you remember clearly where you were. >>> >>> I know where I was. I was in a bagel shop, having breakfast and a >>> discussion with some friends. The TV was on. Another friend was working >>> behind the counter. At about 10 minutes before the hour, the friend >>> behind the counter refreshed our coffee and said, "News is saying a >>> plane hit the World Trade Center." We said, "What, really?" And the >>> friend said, "The building's on fire and it's on TV. They're saying it >>> may have been a small two-engine prop plane." And we kept on talking for >>> a while, but the news started to get our attention. By the top of the >>> hour we had stopped talking and were listening to the news. Three >>> minutes later, we saw the second plane, obviously an airliner, hit the >>> WTC. >>> >>> Now, what were the news people telling YOU when this happened, John? >> >> Remember John, that "journalists" and media people NEVER LIE! You can >> take anything they say as Gospel! >> > > They've been known to lie, and they've certainly been known to make > mistakes. This doesn't mean everything they say is false. And even more often been known to lie and call it "mistakes" when caught. But it certainly DOES mean that nothing they say can be trusted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-28 09:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nft6sq$1mq9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #573857 |
On 4/27/2016 10:16 PM, benj wrote: > On 04/27/2016 08:37 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 4/27/2016 5:36 PM, benj wrote: >>> On 04/27/2016 05:03 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 4/27/2016 2:48 PM, john wrote: >>>>> HE SAID HE SAW IT HAPPEN ON TV. >>>>> Who else did? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't know where you were when the airplanes hit the WTC. I don't >>>> know >>>> if you remember clearly where you were. >>>> >>>> I know where I was. I was in a bagel shop, having breakfast and a >>>> discussion with some friends. The TV was on. Another friend was working >>>> behind the counter. At about 10 minutes before the hour, the friend >>>> behind the counter refreshed our coffee and said, "News is saying a >>>> plane hit the World Trade Center." We said, "What, really?" And the >>>> friend said, "The building's on fire and it's on TV. They're saying it >>>> may have been a small two-engine prop plane." And we kept on talking >>>> for >>>> a while, but the news started to get our attention. By the top of the >>>> hour we had stopped talking and were listening to the news. Three >>>> minutes later, we saw the second plane, obviously an airliner, hit the >>>> WTC. >>>> >>>> Now, what were the news people telling YOU when this happened, John? >>> >>> Remember John, that "journalists" and media people NEVER LIE! You can >>> take anything they say as Gospel! >>> >> >> They've been known to lie, and they've certainly been known to make >> mistakes. This doesn't mean everything they say is false. > > And even more often been known to lie and call it "mistakes" when > caught. But it certainly DOES mean that nothing they say can be trusted. No, it doesn't mean that NOTHING they say can be trusted. That's the point, Ben. You say that unless someone can be verified to tell the truth ALL THE TIME, then NOTHING they say can be trusted. But NOBODY meets that bar, and so you trust no one. Even YOU lie, and so you cannot trust yourself. You have a ridiculous notion of how to discern what to trust and what not to trust, and as a result you have got yourself in an isolation nutjob bubble. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobodyxx@gmail> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 16:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57211bcd$0$28841$c3e8da3$88b277c5@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #573753 |
On 04/27/2016 02:08 PM, john wrote: > If there weren't 65 other things > wrong with the official > story, that would STILL be far-fetched. > Check the time Bush told the > school principal there was a > plane/building accident. > He knew before he exited his limo. > He saw it happen. > HE SAID SO. > What more proof do your retarded > little brains need? > Of course he did. You must admit this was an excellent plan! Secretly "help" the terrorists create a much bigger incident than they would have otherwise done to speed America to the police state dictatorship that HVAC has wet dreams about nightly. It worked so well before in Oklahoma that who could resist doing it again with similar excellent results. Media and shills can keep the lid on all doubts just as before. Comrade, when something is right, it is right!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobodyxx@gmail> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 15:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57211a08$0$64294$b1db1813$e2fc9064@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #573743 |
On 04/27/2016 01:33 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/27/2016 12:23 PM, john wrote: >> 7 wasn't >> > > Nope, and it's not the first building to fall down as a result of NOT > being hit by a plane, either. It's also not the first building to fall > down as a result of NOT being blown up with explosives. Boinker is right, John. One doesn't need kooky conspiracy theories when that building's fall is easily explained by the fact that the building got so depressed at seeing the destruction of it's two long-time pals that it simply collapsed in a heap from grief! No need to look for explosives! As always, Odd's logic and knowledge solves all mysteries!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 15:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nfr8iv$s1s$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #573776 |
On 4/27/2016 2:59 PM, benj wrote: > On 04/27/2016 01:33 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 4/27/2016 12:23 PM, john wrote: >>> 7 wasn't >>> >> >> Nope, and it's not the first building to fall down as a result of NOT >> being hit by a plane, either. It's also not the first building to fall >> down as a result of NOT being blown up with explosives. > > Boinker is right, John. One doesn't need kooky conspiracy theories when > that building's fall is easily explained by the fact that the building > got so depressed at seeing the destruction of it's two long-time pals > that it simply collapsed in a heap from grief! No need to look for > explosives! I'm sure the other buildings that have fallen without explosives or crashing airliners must have died of depression too. > > As always, Odd's logic and knowledge solves all mysteries! -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobodyxx@gmail> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 17:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <572129cd$0$6023$b1db1813$19ace300@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #573789 |
On 04/27/2016 04:48 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/27/2016 2:59 PM, benj wrote: >> On 04/27/2016 01:33 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 4/27/2016 12:23 PM, john wrote: >>>> 7 wasn't >>>> >>> >>> Nope, and it's not the first building to fall down as a result of NOT >>> being hit by a plane, either. It's also not the first building to fall >>> down as a result of NOT being blown up with explosives. >> >> Boinker is right, John. One doesn't need kooky conspiracy theories when >> that building's fall is easily explained by the fact that the building >> got so depressed at seeing the destruction of it's two long-time pals >> that it simply collapsed in a heap from grief! No need to look for >> explosives! > > I'm sure the other buildings that have fallen without explosives or > crashing airliners must have died of depression too. I'm sure. After all, to think otherwise would be science heresy and you wouldn't want a wee taste o' the stake, would you? >> As always, Odd's logic and knowledge solves all mysteries! > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 17:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2f90a086-8bd3-478f-9c35-b002e8ad5a70@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573776 |
BJ quacked Boinker is right, John. One doesn't need kooky conspiracy theories when that building's fall is easily explained by the fact that the building got so depressed at seeing the destruction of it's two long-time pals that it simply collapsed in a heap from grief! No need to look for explosives! ---------------- Of course this humorous (except to the victim's families) story that BJ tells is stolen from 9/11 kook websites. It's not even his. He stole it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobodyxx@gmail> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 23:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57217dee$0$21192$c3e8da3$33881b6a@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #573835 |
On 04/27/2016 08:48 PM, HVAC wrote: > BJ quacked > Boinker is right, John. One doesn't need kooky conspiracy theories when > that building's fall is easily explained by the fact that the building > got so depressed at seeing the destruction of it's two long-time pals > that it simply collapsed in a heap from grief! No need to look for > explosives! > ---------------- > > Of course this humorous (except to the victim's families) story that BJ tells is stolen from 9/11 kook websites. It's not even his. He stole it. > Lie. All of HVAC's life is stolen from websites. He's professional liar. I've never visited 9/11 websites. And In fact I haven't much read the official "explanations" either. But the fact that a building fell down without being hit by ANYTHING is so blatantly absurd that there have to be professional liars out there like HVAC to try to convince the ignorant Americans that what they've seen really is OK. HVAC is just doing his job, but you ignorant Rubes who listen to his screed are really what is so sad.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-28 06:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4a5305ca-4e73-4371-9cb4-22c5bea08ec6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573854 |
BJ quacked > > Of course this humorous (except to the victim's families) story that BJ tells is stolen from 9/11 kook websites. It's not even his. He stole it. > Lie. All of HVAC's life is stolen from websites. He's professional liar. ------------- Typical excuse/denial. Anyone who has raised children (that means not BJ) had heard something similar when one of their kids had been caught with his hand in the cookie jar. You can easily Google up the roots of BJ's 'sympathy' story. BJ, just admit you stole this story and we can move on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-28 06:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <633b37f3-4419-42cf-9639-d46c70df8eae@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573931 |
Well Apparently, HVAC has been told hands-off Chemtrails. Is that because some lawyers have proof that someone has been intentionally disbursing harmful chemicals into the air?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-28 07:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e8f16bee-43d6-47b2-9ac4-5d37f8120a88@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #573937 |
john Well Apparently, HVAC has been told hands-off Chemtrails. Is that because some lawyers have proof that someone has been intentionally disbursing harmful chemicals into the air? ------------- John. Just answer this ONE question. Do you believe in ghosts?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web