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

Groups > sci.physics > #520032 > unrolled thread

Re: Plane truth

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Plane truth "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 18:41 -0500
    Re: Plane truth "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-10 08:59 -0400
      Re: Plane truth moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-10 13:52 +0000
        Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 12:31 -0500
          Re: Plane truth moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-19 18:37 +0000
            Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:03 -0500
            Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:10 -0500
              Re: Plane truth moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-20 05:21 +0000
                Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 10:56 -0500
                  Re: Plane truth moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-20 19:52 +0000
                    Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 15:22 -0500
                      Re: Plane truth "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:29 -0500
                      Re: Plane truth moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-21 01:42 +0000
                        Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 22:11 -0500
                          Re: Plane truth moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-21 05:06 +0000
                            Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 06:14 -0500
                              Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 14:06 -0500
                              Re: Plane truth "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
                          Re: Plane truth Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-21 20:19 +0100
                            Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 15:38 -0500
                        Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:21 -0500
                          Re: Plane truth Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-21 20:19 +0100
                    Re: Plane truth  (Wow Michael found an interesting link ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 15:51 -0500
                      Re: Plane truth  (Wow Michael found an interesting link ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:30 -0500
                    Re: Plane truth "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 16:56 -0500
                      Re: Plane truth "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:30 -0500
                  Re: Plane truth Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 21:05 +0100
                Re: Plane truth  ( WTC Core Columns Turn To Dust? ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:40 -0500
              Re: Plane truth Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 09:52 +0100
              Re: Plane truth "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:10 -0500
      Re: Plane truth BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-10 10:26 -0400
        Re: Plane truth 9/11 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-11 09:34 -0400
      Re: Plane truth "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 19:34 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#520032 — Re: Plane truth

On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 13:35:52 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:

>Rocky wrote:
>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>> news:msnprk$4s4$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> There were stories that the passengers were identified by their DNA
>>>> but how
>>>> do you match DNA with only one sample?  Yep, that is how stupid the
>>>> media thought we were so there isn't much about how they figured out
>>>> who was who anymore.  <G>
>>>
>>> They can get DNA from a toothbrush or hairbrush, k00ktard.  And even in
>>> the unlikely case that's not available, they test a very close relative
>>> and from there determine whether the victim's DNA is from someone
>>> closely related to the relative, and how, and by process of
>>> elimination, who. As in: "The DNA we recovered from the Pentagon is 
>>> related to you as
>>> your brother.  You say you have two brothers, one is safe and sound,
>>> but the other hasn't been heard from since boarding Flight 77?"
>>
>> But that is the entire issue they never collected samples to match
>> against and then they flew what they said they had all over the place
>> for some crazy reason.
>>
>> As I've stated this before.  The way you can tell 9/11 was just a show
>> or should I say a road show was how fast they packed it all up
>> afterwards.
>> Rocky
>
>
>Another fairytale was that all the human remains were identified by DNA 
>analysis.
>NO IT WASN'T
>They never asked any victims families to provide anything to match to.
>

     That is an outright LIE on your part. They did ask for and
receive DNA samples. All but a very few were identified with DNA.
Those that were not identified are presumed to have been the
terrorists.

>AND,....after two weeks they quit looking for survivors or even body parts, 
>and even had the NYC fires and police departments up in arms that they just 
>decided to haul everything away for disposal without further examination.

     While there were objections, these objections were ignored.
Everything was examined. Very closely. 

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

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#520095

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 13:35:52 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Rocky wrote:
>>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>> news:msnprk$4s4$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> There were stories that the passengers were identified by their DNA
>>>>> but how
>>>>> do you match DNA with only one sample?  Yep, that is how stupid the
>>>>> media thought we were so there isn't much about how they figured out
>>>>> who was who anymore.  <G>
>>>>
>>>> They can get DNA from a toothbrush or hairbrush, k00ktard.  And even
>>>> in the unlikely case that's not available, they test a very close
>>>> relative and from there determine whether the victim's DNA is from
>>>> someone closely related to the relative, and how, and by process of
>>>> elimination, who. As in: "The DNA we recovered from the Pentagon is
>>>> related to you as
>>>> your brother.  You say you have two brothers, one is safe and sound,
>>>> but the other hasn't been heard from since boarding Flight 77?"
>>>
>>> But that is the entire issue they never collected samples to match
>>> against and then they flew what they said they had all over the place
>>> for some crazy reason.
>>>
>>> As I've stated this before.  The way you can tell 9/11 was just a show
>>> or should I say a road show was how fast they packed it all up
>>> afterwards.
>>> Rocky
>>
>>
>> Another fairytale was that all the human remains were identified by DNA
>> analysis.
>> NO IT WASN'T
>> They never asked any victims families to provide anything to match to.
>>
>
>     That is an outright LIE on your part. They did ask for and
> receive DNA samples. All but a very few were identified with DNA.
> Those that were not identified are presumed to have been the
> terrorists.
>
>> AND,....after two weeks they quit looking for survivors or even body
>> parts, and even had the NYC fires and police departments up in arms
>> that they just decided to haul everything away for disposal without
>> further examination.
>
>     While there were objections, these objections were ignored.
> Everything was examined. Very closely.



Ya, just as closely as the looked at the molten metal.
You are so full of shit, I'll bet you have brown eyes.

But if you read that DNA tests were preformed on EVEY body part in a few 
weeks of the over 3000 people that "officially" were killed, in under 2 
weeks.

WOW, you really are too deluded to help. 

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

#520098

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes:

>>     While there were objections, these objections were ignored.
>> Everything was examined. Very closely.

>But if you read that DNA tests were preformed on EVEY body part in a few 
>weeks of the over 3000 people that "officially" were killed, in under 2 
>weeks.

They did not.

While they did identify* all but 5 people from the Pentagon and everyone 
from Flight 93 (not always via DNA), only about 1000 total were ever 
identified from the Twin Towers.

(*) some body parts/DNA profiles were never linked to known people, these
are presumed to be from the hijackers.

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

#521078

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mss1u0$584$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes:
>
>>>     While there were objections, these objections were ignored.
>>> Everything was examined. Very closely.
>
>>But if you read that DNA tests were preformed on EVEY body part in a few
>>weeks of the over 3000 people that "officially" were killed, in under 2
>>weeks.
>
> They did not.
>
> While they did identify* all but 5 people from the Pentagon and everyone
> from Flight 93 (not always via DNA), only about 1000 total were ever
> identified from the Twin Towers.
>
> (*) some body parts/DNA profiles were never linked to known people, these
> are presumed to be from the hijackers.

I HAVE TOLD YOU BEFORE if you want Bast to see your reply you have to post 
to alt.astronomy.

But there was no DNA from Muslims and they failed to tell you that.  DUH.

And a great video that points out how many lies we were told about the 
Pentagon is:

Behind the Smoke Curtain - 2nd Edition (2015)
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXBk8JqwFlw

And if you are interested in the movie bloopers and blunders made by the 
9/11 Hoaxsters see:
  news:ZKCdndHJ-JcNYmvInZ2dnUU7-TednZ2d@giganews.com...

Rocky 

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

#522064

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

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mss1u0$584$1@pcls7.std.com...

>> While they did identify* all but 5 people from the Pentagon and everyone
>> from Flight 93 (not always via DNA), only about 1000 total were ever
>> identified from the Twin Towers.
>>
>> (*) some body parts/DNA profiles were never linked to known people, these
>> are presumed to be from the hijackers.

>I HAVE TOLD YOU BEFORE if you want Bast to see your reply you have to post 
>to alt.astronomy.

If Bast wants to read my posts, Bast knows what to do.

>But there was no DNA from Muslims and they failed to tell you that.  DUH.

You can't tell anyone's religion from DNA, k00k.  However, they can tell 
ethnicity, and the unknown DNA was all likely Middle Eastern.  And two
of them were brothers.

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

#522130

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mtka0e$hr$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mss1u0$584$1@pcls7.std.com...
>
>>> While they did identify* all but 5 people from the Pentagon and everyone
>>> from Flight 93 (not always via DNA), only about 1000 total were ever
>>> identified from the Twin Towers.
>>>
>>> (*) some body parts/DNA profiles were never linked to known people, 
>>> these
>>> are presumed to be from the hijackers.
>
>>I HAVE TOLD YOU BEFORE if you want Bast to see your reply you have to post
>>to alt.astronomy.
>
> If Bast wants to read my posts, Bast knows what to do.
>
>>But there was no DNA from Muslims and they failed to tell you that.  DUH.
>
> You can't tell anyone's religion from DNA, k00k.  However, they can tell
> ethnicity, and the unknown DNA was all likely Middle Eastern.  And two
> of them were brothers. 

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

#522131

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mtka0e$hr$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mss1u0$584$1@pcls7.std.com...
>
>>> While they did identify* all but 5 people from the Pentagon and everyone
>>> from Flight 93 (not always via DNA), only about 1000 total were ever
>>> identified from the Twin Towers.
>>>
>>> (*) some body parts/DNA profiles were never linked to known people, 
>>> these
>>> are presumed to be from the hijackers.
>
>>I HAVE TOLD YOU BEFORE if you want Bast to see your reply you have to post
>>to alt.astronomy.
>
> If Bast wants to read my posts, Bast knows what to do.
>
>>But there was no DNA from Muslims and they failed to tell you that.  DUH.
>
> You can't tell anyone's religion from DNA, k00k.  However, they can tell
> ethnicity, and the unknown DNA was all likely Middle Eastern.  And two
> of them were brothers.

Again, the lack of airplane parts around the Pentagon or Pranksville, PA 
proved those two stories were bogus and the lack of crash dynamics at in 
Nuke York City proved those two stories were bogus.

Besides you have yet to tell me why there were survivors in the bottom 
floors of the North Tower and why nothing ended up in the basement.  <G>
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

Or why there was so much M291 resin spread on the areas the haze was coming 
from in the above photo.  See:
 http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2009/05/covering-ground-zero-with-dirt.html 

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

#522153

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

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mtka0e$hr$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>But there was no DNA from Muslims and they failed to tell you that.  DUH.
>>
>> You can't tell anyone's religion from DNA, k00k.  However, they can tell
>> ethnicity, and the unknown DNA was all likely Middle Eastern.  And two
>> of them were brothers.

>Again, the lack of airplane parts around the Pentagon or Pranksville, PA 

WHAT lack of airplane parts, lying kook?  They recovered 95% of each of
the two planes!!

>Besides you have yet to tell me why there were survivors in the bottom 
>floors of the North Tower

As I already said before, a combination of an off-center collapse and some
pure luck that the large mass of the collapsing building didn't strike
the stairwell.

> and why nothing ended up in the basement.  <G>

It did end up in the basement, raving kook, as your photo shows.
There was nothing magical about the ground lobby floor that would have
withstood 110 floors of building collapsing onto it.  The collapse 
continued, stopping only when it reached bedrock 70' below.  As your
photo shows, the debris filled the basement below the towers up to street
level.

Of course much of the concourse level away from the towers' bases remained
standing.

We don't need to repeat the dozen or so reasons that disprove the
totally ridiculous "nuclear detonation" kooktardery.  We already know
nuclear bombs there are absolutely impossible.

>Or why there was so much M291 resin spread on the areas the haze was coming 
>from in the above photo.

You don't even know what "M291 resin" is.  It's for the military for
neutralizing and removing chemical warfare agents quickly and effectively
from the skin, not for removing radioactivity from World Trade Centers!

Stoopid kooktard!

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

#522220

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mtlfoc$pd$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mtka0e$hr$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>But there was no DNA from Muslims and they failed to tell you that. 
>>>>DUH.
>>>
>>> You can't tell anyone's religion from DNA, k00k.  However, they can tell
>>> ethnicity, and the unknown DNA was all likely Middle Eastern.  And two
>>> of them were brothers.
>
>>Again, the lack of airplane parts around the Pentagon or Pranksville, PA
>
> WHAT lack of airplane parts, lying kook?  They recovered 95% of each of
> the two planes!!

riiight.  Maybe they recovered 95% of the airplane that crashed but they 
never let us know it was really a scale model that crashed.

Besides where is your supporting link?


>>Besides you have yet to tell me why there were survivors in the bottom
>>floors of the North Tower
>
> As I already said before, a combination of an off-center collapse and some
> pure luck that the large mass of the collapsing building didn't strike
> the stairwell.
>
>> and why nothing ended up in the basement.  <G>
>
> It did end up in the basement, raving kook, as your photo shows.

riiight.  There was nothing in the basements as other videos proved and how 
you could deduce what ended up in the basement from an above ground photo? 
Could it be that you took your physics lessons from Wile E. Coyote?


> There was nothing magical about the ground lobby floor that would have
> withstood 110 floors of building collapsing onto it.  The collapse
> continued, stopping only when it reached bedrock 70' below.  As your
> photo shows, the debris filled the basement below the towers up to street
> level.

And yet it couldn't crush the Survivors or the outside walls that were left 
standing strong.  BTW I don't follow the version of physics that only 
happened on 9/11.

> Of course much of the concourse level away from the towers' bases remained
> standing.

But those wall were directly under the exoskeleton of the Twin Towers.  Not 
only does your bullshit fail to hold water but if there was any truth to it 
then why didn't NIST address the issue?

Heck, NIST wasn't even allowed to address what remained of the Twin Towers 
because they are not consistent with a collapse.


> We don't need to repeat the dozen or so reasons that disprove the
> totally ridiculous "nuclear detonation" kooktardery.  We already know
> nuclear bombs there are absolutely impossible.

Too bad you have to tell so many lies about what happened on 9/11 like the 
lie about "a combination of an off-center collapse and some pure luck that 
the large mass of the collapsing building didn't strike the stairwell."

Off-center collapse only happens with 9/11 physics, pure luck only happens 
with 9/11 physics and what "large mass" when the Twin Towers were reduced to 
dust that was so fine it could float up instead of down?

>>Or why there was so much M291 resin spread on the areas the haze was 
>>coming
>>from in the above photo.
>
> You don't even know what "M291 resin" is.  It's for the military for
> neutralizing and removing chemical warfare agents quickly and effectively
> from the skin, not for removing radioactivity from World Trade Centers!

Who said it was to remove any radioactivity?  It was used to cover the areas 
where the nukes were detonated to keep the radioactivity from spreading too 
fast.

And there is nothing scientific at all about your "off-center" collapse", 
"pure luck" or "large mass" without evidence of a large mass.  <G>

> Stoopid kooktard!

But you are the one that stooped to using off-center physics, pure luck 
physics or talk about a "large mass" when the only big parts of the Twin 
Towers that survived were either above the vaporization area or below the 
vaporization area of a deep underground nuke.  <G>

Rocky 

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

#522266

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

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mtlfoc$pd$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>Again, the lack of airplane parts around the Pentagon or Pranksville, PA
>>
>> WHAT lack of airplane parts, lying kook?  They recovered 95% of each of
>> the two planes!!

>riiight.  Maybe they recovered 95% of the airplane that crashed but they 
>never let us know it was really a scale model that crashed.

There you go again, making up crap again.

>Besides where is your supporting link?

K00ktard, you never give supporting links for your "lack of airplane parts"
claim or your "scale model" claim.  And don't respond with the URL of a
4 hour kookvid.  That's not support, that's just the uneducated claim of
another kooktard.  That is, assuming it's not a pack of lies, I just got
through proving that kookvids contain tampered videos.

But here's a bone for you anyway.  
http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp

>> It did end up in the basement, raving kook, as your photo shows.

>riiight.  There was nothing in the basements as other videos proved and how 
>you could deduce what ended up in the basement from an above ground photo? 

Your photo shows the top of the debris field about level with street which
is just about exactly right considering the volume of debris the towers
would generate.

Where else would the debris be?  Why would it not crash through into the
bathtub?  After all, 1.5 million tons (108,222 truckloads!) was removed
from the site, so we know it was there.

And of course, you have *never* produced a photo of untouched bottom 
levels of either tower, free of debris.  No, not a part of the concourse
500 feet away, the lower levels of the towers.

>> There was nothing magical about the ground lobby floor that would have
>> withstood 110 floors of building collapsing onto it.  The collapse
>> continued, stopping only when it reached bedrock 70' below.  As your
>> photo shows, the debris filled the basement below the towers up to street
>> level.

>And yet it couldn't crush the Survivors or the outside walls that were left 
>standing strong.  BTW I don't follow the version of physics that only 
>happened on 9/11.

Sometimes dumb luck just happens.  It just so happened the major mass of
the towers didn't crush the stairway.  Note that there was no similar
"Stairwell B" in the South Tower.

Not to mention, of course, a nuke would have vaporized Stairwell B and all
within it.

>> Of course much of the concourse level away from the towers' bases remained
>> standing.

>But those wall were directly under the exoskeleton of the Twin Towers.  Not 
>only does your bullshit fail to hold water but if there was any truth to it 
>then why didn't NIST address the issue?

>Heck, NIST wasn't even allowed to address what remained of the Twin Towers 
>because they are not consistent with a collapse.

You're just babbling.  And again, you never provided proof nothing fell
into the basement levels of the towers.


>>>Or why there was so much M291 resin spread on the areas the haze was 
>>>coming
>>>from in the above photo.
>>
>> You don't even know what "M291 resin" is.  It's for the military for
>> neutralizing and removing chemical warfare agents quickly and effectively
>> from the skin, not for removing radioactivity from World Trade Centers!

>Who said it was to remove any radioactivity?  It was used to cover the areas 
>where the nukes were detonated to keep the radioactivity from spreading too 
>fast.

Your second sentence contradicts your first.  You're babbling again.

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

#522274

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mtn2q4$o2q$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mtlfoc$pd$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>Again, the lack of airplane parts around the Pentagon or Pranksville, PA
>>>
>>> WHAT lack of airplane parts, lying kook?  They recovered 95% of each of
>>> the two planes!!
>
>>riiight.  Maybe they recovered 95% of the airplane that crashed but they
>>never let us know it was really a scale model that crashed.
>
> There you go again, making up crap again.
>
>>Besides where is your supporting link?
>
> K00ktard, you never give supporting links for your "lack of airplane 
> parts"
> claim or your "scale model" claim.  And don't respond with the URL of a
> 4 hour kookvid.  That's not support, that's just the uneducated claim of
> another kooktard.  That is, assuming it's not a pack of lies, I just got
> through proving that kookvids contain tampered videos.
>
> But here's a bone for you anyway.
> http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp

Just as I suspected all talk and no show which is consistant with BS on the 
go.


>>> It did end up in the basement, raving kook, as your photo shows.
>
>>riiight.  There was nothing in the basements as other videos proved and 
>>how
>>you could deduce what ended up in the basement from an above ground photo?
>
> Your photo shows the top of the debris field about level with street which
> is just about exactly right considering the volume of debris the towers
> would generate.

But that is assuming it used the basement which it did not and again where 
is your link?  <G>  Oh and this time try to find a link with photographic 
evidence instead of a story obviously full of BS.


> Where else would the debris be?  Why would it not crash through into the
> bathtub?  After all, 1.5 million tons (108,222 truckloads!) was removed
> from the site, so we know it was there.

But how many of those truckloads were hauled in?  We know from Judy Wood 
that the very first 105 dumptrucks hauled something in.  And we know from 
another site that whatever was hauled in was placed on one of the spots 
where they found molten metal.


> And of course, you have *never* produced a photo of untouched bottom
> levels of either tower, free of debris.  No, not a part of the concourse
> 500 feet away, the lower levels of the towers.

I've seen a video by WCBS that proved the basements of the Twin Towers were 
untouched just like the lower 6 floors of Stairwell B in the North Tower 
were untouched and that wasn't because of off-center physics or pure luck 
physics either they were just under the vaporization range of the nuke that 
was deep under WTC3.


>>> There was nothing magical about the ground lobby floor that would have
>>> withstood 110 floors of building collapsing onto it.  The collapse
>>> continued, stopping only when it reached bedrock 70' below.  As your
>>> photo shows, the debris filled the basement below the towers up to 
>>> street
>>> level.
>
>>And yet it couldn't crush the Survivors or the outside walls that were 
>>left
>>standing strong.  BTW I don't follow the version of physics that only
>>happened on 9/11.
>
> Sometimes dumb luck just happens.  It just so happened the major mass of
> the towers didn't crush the stairway.  Note that there was no similar
> "Stairwell B" in the South Tower.

But the nuke that destroyed the South Tower was closer to the west side of 
the South Tower instead of the South side so they were not destroyed the 
exact same way. DUH


> Not to mention, of course, a nuke would have vaporized Stairwell B and all
> within it.

If that nuke were even deeper in the bedrock it wouldn't have destroyed any 
part of the North Tower at all because it would have just made a great big 
cavity underground.  As it was the blast went nearly up as proven by what 
was left of both of the Towers in the following photo:
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

>>> Of course much of the concourse level away from the towers' bases 
>>> remained
>>> standing.
>
>>But those wall were directly under the exoskeleton of the Twin Towers. 
>>Not
>>only does your bullshit fail to hold water but if there was any truth to 
>>it
>>then why didn't NIST address the issue?
>
>>Heck, NIST wasn't even allowed to address what remained of the Twin Towers
>>because they are not consistent with a collapse.
>
> You're just babbling.  And again, you never provided proof nothing fell
> into the basement levels of the towers.

I proved the masive debris did not crush the Survivors or crush the wall at 
the bottom of the exoskeleton and you have failed to prove the debris made 
it by those two parts into the basement.  <G>
 http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg

And you then you have not proven were all the dust came from that covered 
large parts of Manhattan Island.  <G>


>>>>Or why there was so much M291 resin spread on the areas the haze was
>>>>coming
>>>>from in the above photo.
>>>
>>> You don't even know what "M291 resin" is.  It's for the military for
>>> neutralizing and removing chemical warfare agents quickly and 
>>> effectively
>>> from the skin, not for removing radioactivity from World Trade Centers!
>
>>Who said it was to remove any radioactivity?  It was used to cover the 
>>areas
>>where the nukes were detonated to keep the radioactivity from spreading 
>>too
>>fast.
>
> Your second sentence contradicts your first.  You're babbling again.

Radiation goes down on it's own.  By now the place where the nukes were 
detonated is safe to enter and it has probably been that way for years.  As 
a matter of fact since the nuke under WTC7 was clearly smaller than the 
nukes under WTC3 and WTC4 they could rebuild WTC7 a lot faster than they 
could rebuild the Twin Towers.

And do not forget about the following videos because somebody was clearly 
trying to tell us something.  And do not forget in the video Doc Brown was 
dealing with Nuclear Terrorist and on top of that even Muslim Terrorist. 
<G>

BACK TO THE FUTURE predicts 9/11
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ULjJ3EqyY

JFK and 9/11 in Back to the Future - Hidden Messages In Plain Sight
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFM02ItYKbY

Back To the FUTURE 3: DECODED ? 1990 is 11 Years To 9/11
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB641NgMMZ0

Back to the Future Movie Decoded FULL VERSION
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_P_wLBxpYE

And you can find even more if you go to:
 https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+back+to+the+future

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

#522378

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:22:15 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mtn2q4$o2q$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>news:mtlfoc$pd$1@pcls7.std.com...
>>>>>Again, the lack of airplane parts around the Pentagon or Pranksville, PA
>>>>
>>>> WHAT lack of airplane parts, lying kook?  They recovered 95% of each of
>>>> the two planes!!
>>
>>>riiight.  Maybe they recovered 95% of the airplane that crashed but they
>>>never let us know it was really a scale model that crashed.
>>
>> There you go again, making up crap again.
>>
>>>Besides where is your supporting link?
>>
>> K00ktard, you never give supporting links for your "lack of airplane 
>> parts"
>> claim or your "scale model" claim.  And don't respond with the URL of a
>> 4 hour kookvid.  That's not support, that's just the uneducated claim of
>> another kooktard.  That is, assuming it's not a pack of lies, I just got
>> through proving that kookvids contain tampered videos.
>>
>> But here's a bone for you anyway.
>> http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp
>
>Just as I suspected all talk and no show which is consistant with BS on the 
>go.
>

     I like how you ALWAYS deny the validity of that which PROVES you
wrong.

>>>> It did end up in the basement, raving kook, as your photo shows.
>>
>>>riiight.  There was nothing in the basements as other videos proved and 
>>>how
>>>you could deduce what ended up in the basement from an above ground photo?
>>
>> Your photo shows the top of the debris field about level with street which
>> is just about exactly right considering the volume of debris the towers
>> would generate.
>
>But that is assuming it used the basement which it did not 

     Once again I'll ask, and once again you'll not answer, where is
your evidence for this claim?

>and again where 
>is your link?  <G>  Oh and this time try to find a link with photographic 
>evidence instead of a story obviously full of BS.
>

     Wouldn't he first need to offer a story full of BS, obvious or
not?

>> Where else would the debris be?  Why would it not crash through into the
>> bathtub?  After all, 1.5 million tons (108,222 truckloads!) was removed
>> from the site, so we know it was there.
>
>But how many of those truckloads were hauled in?  

     Very little diatomaceous earth was brought in. No where near the
1.5 million tons of debris that was removed.

>We know from Judy Wood 

     She's the crazy woman who claims a picture taken almost a week
after 9/11 was taken the day of 9/11, right? And she claims an energy
weapon was used to bring down the twin towers as well, right?
     This is the woman you give credibility? Really?

>that the very first 105 dumptrucks hauled something in.  And we know from 
>another site that whatever was hauled in was placed on one of the spots 
>where they found molten metal.

     Where is your link? <G>

>> And of course, you have *never* produced a photo of untouched bottom
>> levels of either tower, free of debris.  No, not a part of the concourse
>> 500 feet away, the lower levels of the towers.
>
>I've seen a video by WCBS that proved the basements of the Twin Towers were 
>untouched just like the lower 6 floors of Stairwell B in the North Tower 
>were untouched and that wasn't because of off-center physics or pure luck 
>physics either they were just under the vaporization range of the nuke that 
>was deep under WTC3.
>

     Where is your link? <G>

>>>> There was nothing magical about the ground lobby floor that would have
>>>> withstood 110 floors of building collapsing onto it.  The collapse
>>>> continued, stopping only when it reached bedrock 70' below.  As your
>>>> photo shows, the debris filled the basement below the towers up to 
>>>> street level.
>>
>>>And yet it couldn't crush the Survivors or the outside walls that were 
>>>left
>>>standing strong.  BTW I don't follow the version of physics that only
>>>happened on 9/11.
>>
>> Sometimes dumb luck just happens.  It just so happened the major mass of
>> the towers didn't crush the stairway.  Note that there was no similar
>> "Stairwell B" in the South Tower.
>
>But the nuke that destroyed the South Tower was closer to the west side of 
>the South Tower instead of the South side so they were not destroyed the 
>exact same way. DUH

     Still, it would have destroyed the whole of the lower levels on
its way up to the middle levels. DUH.

>
>> Not to mention, of course, a nuke would have vaporized Stairwell B and all
>> within it.
>
>If that nuke were even deeper in the bedrock it wouldn't have destroyed any 
>part of the North Tower at all because it would have just made a great big 
>cavity underground.  

     It would have. This is how we KNOW no nukes were used.
    Had a cavity formed, everything above it would have collapsed into
it. This would leave a very noticeable indentation in the ground. No
such indentation is seen.
     Once again you help to PROVE no nukes were used. Thank you for
your valuable assistance in proving no nukes were ever used.

>As it was the blast went nearly up as proven by what 
>was left of both of the Towers in the following photo:
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>

     Once again, that image PROVES your claims wrong.
     Note the lack of any indentation in the ground. 

>>>> Of course much of the concourse level away from the towers' bases 
>>>> remained standing.
>>
>>>But those wall were directly under the exoskeleton of the Twin Towers. 
>>>Not
>>>only does your bullshit fail to hold water but if there was any truth to 
>>>it then why didn't NIST address the issue?
>>
>>>Heck, NIST wasn't even allowed to address what remained of the Twin Towers
>>>because they are not consistent with a collapse.
>>
>> You're just babbling.  And again, you never provided proof nothing fell
>> into the basement levels of the towers.
>
>I proved the masive debris did not crush the Survivors or crush the wall at 
>the bottom of the exoskeleton and you have failed to prove the debris made 
>it by those two parts into the basement.  <G>
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
>

     See above.

>And you then you have not proven were all the dust came from that covered 
>large parts of Manhattan Island.  <G>
>

     It's been PROVED a few times. Things like Drywall, some concrete,
and other pulverized material accounts for the dust. You already know
this, so the question becomes, what do you believe you gain with your
deceptive question?
     Please don't waste time with your usual avoidance games. Answer
the question I asked.

>>>>>Or why there was so much M291 resin spread on the areas the haze was
>>>>>coming from in the above photo.
>>>>
>>>> You don't even know what "M291 resin" is.  It's for the military for
>>>> neutralizing and removing chemical warfare agents quickly and 
>>>> effectively from the skin, not for removing radioactivity from World Trade Centers!
>>
>>>Who said it was to remove any radioactivity?  It was used to cover the 
>>>areas
>>>where the nukes were detonated to keep the radioactivity from spreading 
>>>too fast.
>>
>> Your second sentence contradicts your first.  You're babbling again.
>
>Radiation goes down on it's own.  By now the place where the nukes were 
>detonated is safe to enter and it has probably been that way for years.  As 
>a matter of fact since the nuke under WTC7 was clearly smaller than the 
>nukes under WTC3 and WTC4 they could rebuild WTC7 a lot faster than they 
>could rebuild the Twin Towers.
>

     Or, as is the case in reality, #7 was already planned to be
brought down due to black mold and asbestos. Most of the plans to
rebuild were in existence. This saved a great deal of time, allowing
reconstruction to begin quickly.
     Since there were no plans to bring down the twin towers, there
were no plans to rebuild. 

>And do not forget about the following videos because somebody was clearly 
>trying to tell us something.  And do not forget in the video Doc Brown was 
>dealing with Nuclear Terrorist and on top of that even Muslim Terrorist. 
><G>
>
>BACK TO THE FUTURE predicts 9/11
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ULjJ3EqyY
>

     Damn that Michael J. Fox! He was behind it all!
     Parkinson's my ass! His tremors are the result of the guilt he's
hiding for masterminding the who 9/11 attacks.

>JFK and 9/11 in Back to the Future - Hidden Messages In Plain Sight
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFM02ItYKbY
>

     Naturally Christopher Lloyd (Doc Brown) had a part in it.

>Back To the FUTURE 3: DECODED ? 1990 is 11 Years To 9/11
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB641NgMMZ0
>

     Well, that prove it. Crispin Glover was one of the rank and file
members of this vast conspiracy!

>Back to the Future Movie Decoded FULL VERSION
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_P_wLBxpYE
>

     Not Lea Thompson as well? Damn her!
     At least James Tolkan (Mr. Strickland) appears to have been
innocent in the matter.

>And you can find even more if you go to:
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+back+to+the+future

     Not James Tolkan too? Now his baldness makes sense. It was all
due to 9/11 radiation! 


For the benefit of Roger, since his learning disability is very real:

     I'm being sarcastic. But my claims are every bit as valid as
yours. That is, not at all.
     I have no doubt that if I were to devote the time, effort and
energy, I could find completely unrelated items that a mentally ill
person would believe connects to 9/11.


"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]

#522408

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

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mtn2q4$o2q$1@pcls7.std.com...

>> But here's a bone for you anyway.
>> http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp

>Just as I suspected all talk and no show which is consistant with BS on the 
>go.

Just like you, kook. Demand a link and when there is one that proves you
wrong, you brush it off.

>>>> It did end up in the basement, raving kook, as your photo shows.
>>
>>>riiight.  There was nothing in the basements as other videos proved and 

Link?

>But that is assuming it used the basement which it did not and again where 
>is your link?  <G>  Oh and this time try to find a link with photographic 
>evidence instead of a story obviously full of BS.

It is your claim that there was nothing in the basement.  You provide the
link.  And again, below the towers, not 500' away.

>> Where else would the debris be?  Why would it not crash through into the
>> bathtub?  After all, 1.5 million tons (108,222 truckloads!) was removed
>> from the site, so we know it was there.

>But how many of those truckloads were hauled in?

I already accounted for the trivial 120 truckloads you say were hauled in.  
That's why I said 108,222 truckloads were hauled out, not 108,342
truckloads (official figure).

>  We know from Judy Wood 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

>that the very first 105 dumptrucks hauled something in.

I thought you said 120 truckloads?  Regardless, 105 or 120 truckloads is
trivial compared to 108,342 truckloads hauled out.
Even you, as a failed trucker, should understand that.

>  And we know from 
>another site that whatever was hauled in was placed on one of the spots 
>where they found molten metal.

What molten metal?  Image?  (and no, not the excavator holding red-hot
something, I mean actual molten metal)

>> And of course, you have *never* produced a photo of untouched bottom
>> levels of either tower, free of debris.  No, not a part of the concourse
>> 500 feet away, the lower levels of the towers.

>I've seen a video by WCBS that proved the basements of the Twin Towers were 
>untouched

Link?  There's no way anyone will believe your broken brain when you say
you saw something.

>> Not to mention, of course, a nuke would have vaporized Stairwell B and all
>> within it.

>If that nuke were even deeper in the bedrock it wouldn't have destroyed any 
>part of the North Tower at all because it would have just made a great big 
>cavity underground.  

And the cavity would have collapsed, producing a 1200' crater.

>> You're just babbling.  And again, you never provided proof nothing fell
>> into the basement levels of the towers.

>I proved the masive debris did not crush the Survivors or crush the wall at 
>the bottom of the exoskeleton and you have failed to prove the debris made 
>it by those two parts into the basement.  <G>

You keep claiming nothing fell into the basement levels yet you haven't
yet provided any support for this whatsoever.  So I'll ask again: Link?

>And you then you have not proven were all the dust came from that covered 
>large parts of Manhattan Island.  <G>

We all know that the trivial amount of dust (trivial compared to 1.5 
million tons) came from pulverized drywall and concrete.

>>>>>Or why there was so much M291 resin spread on the areas the haze was
>>>>>coming
>>>>>from in the above photo.
>>>>
>>>> You don't even know what "M291 resin" is.  It's for the military for
>>>> neutralizing and removing chemical warfare agents quickly and 
>>>> effectively
>>>> from the skin, not for removing radioactivity from World Trade Centers!
>>
>>>Who said it was to remove any radioactivity?  It was used to cover the 
>>>areas
>>>where the nukes were detonated to keep the radioactivity from spreading 
>>>too
>>>fast.
>>
>> Your second sentence contradicts your first.  You're babbling again.

>Radiation goes down on it's own.  By now the place where the nukes were 
>detonated is safe to enter and it has probably been that way for years.  As 
>a matter of fact since the nuke under WTC7 was clearly smaller than the 
>nukes under WTC3 and WTC4 they could rebuild WTC7 a lot faster than they 
>could rebuild the Twin Towers.

You're babbling.  M291 resin has nothing to do with radioactivity, it's
for chemical warfare agent first aid (VX, mustard gas etc.)
If there was a nuclear device, the area couldn't be entered for about
70 days, yet rescuers were there the first day and the freaking President
of the United States was there the third day!!

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

#522418

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mtnnaf$n8t$2@pcls7.std.com...

Funny that you removed the following from your reply as if I wouldn't 
notice.  <G>

And do not forget about the following videos because somebody was clearly
trying to tell us something.  And do not forget in the video Doc Brown was
dealing with Nuclear Terrorist and on top of that even Muslim Terrorist.
<G>

BACK TO THE FUTURE predicts 9/11
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ULjJ3EqyY

JFK and 9/11 in Back to the Future - Hidden Messages In Plain Sight
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFM02ItYKbY

Back To the FUTURE 3: DECODED ? 1990 is 11 Years To 9/11
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB641NgMMZ0

Back to the Future Movie Decoded FULL VERSION
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_P_wLBxpYE

And you can find even more if you go to:
 https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+back+to+the+future 

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

#522429

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


>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mtnnaf$n8t$2@pcls7.std.com...

>Funny that you removed the following from your reply as if I wouldn't 
>notice.  <G>

I have no idea whether those are more 4 hour kookvids, some sort of parody
or paranoia-soaked ravings that "Back to the Future" movies somehow
predicted 9/11, but I am not curious enough to look. URLs were deleted
unwatched.

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

#522453

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mto39a$9f0$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>
>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>news:mtnnaf$n8t$2@pcls7.std.com...
>
>>Funny that you removed the following from your reply as if I wouldn't
>>notice.  <G>
>
> I have no idea whether those are more 4 hour kookvids, some sort of parody
> or paranoia-soaked ravings that "Back to the Future" movies somehow
> predicted 9/11, but I am not curious enough to look. URLs were deleted
> unwatched.

ROTFLMAO because there was clearly no prediction whatsoever in Back to the 
Future.  It is sort of like this video:

9-11 ON CLOCKS IN OVER A DOZEN MOVIES SINCE THE 60s !!! & Live Moment Planes 
Hit Towers
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtNBgxS04Uc

Don't forget that the group of people that had CGIs added to videos of Nuke 
York City could also make movies about Nuke York City ahead of time so that 
is what they did.  DUH.

Put back in again for someone that spends so much time denying the evidence.

And do not forget about the following videos because somebody was clearly
trying to tell us something.  And do not forget in the video Doc Brown was
dealing with Nuclear Terrorist and on top of that even Muslim Terrorist.
<G>

BACK TO THE FUTURE predicts 9/11
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ULjJ3EqyY

JFK and 9/11 in Back to the Future - Hidden Messages In Plain Sight
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFM02ItYKbY

Back To the FUTURE 3: DECODED ? 1990 is 11 Years To 9/11
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB641NgMMZ0

Back to the Future Movie Decoded FULL VERSION
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_P_wLBxpYE

And you can find even more if you go to:
 https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+back+to+the+future

========================================================

Given that everything else points to the use of nukes in Nuke York City 
including the sudden shaking of the North Tower, why Ground Zero was really 
Ground Zero and the fact that seismic reading can be tainted you might want 
to watch the following video if you can not watch any of the other videos 
above:

9-11 ON CLOCKS IN OVER A DOZEN MOVIES SINCE THE 60s !!! & Live Moment Planes 
Hit Towers
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtNBgxS04Uc

Rocky 

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

#522525

"dmaster" <dan.woj@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message 
news:39fda942-d4e5-45ad-869e-a66686610890@googlegroups.com...
On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 6:15:48 AM UTC-5, Rocky wrote:
...
> 9-11 ON CLOCKS IN OVER A DOZEN MOVIES SINCE THE 60s !!! & Live Moment 
> Planes
> Hit Towers
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtNBgxS04Uc
>
> Rocky

Come on folks, if anyone had any thought that Rocky might actually, 
seriously believe anything he has been promoting about 9/11, this ought to 
dispel that notion for good. He is yanking your chain. When his latest 
nuttiness is wearing thin, ta da! something even nuttier. He has got to be 
trolling to see just how far you are willing to chase him.

Dan (Woj...)

=========================

ROTFLMAO because you have been in a constant state of denial for 14 years 
and the sad thing is there are more and more facts coming out that you are 
the idiot and not those that doubted the official bullshit about the alleged 
hijackers.

And not only that I've caught you in a world of lies trying to support the 
lies of the media and the government.  <G>

9/11 Exposed - 2nd Edition (2015) Full Documentary Film
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXRDq9nKJ0U

Rocky

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

#522657

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:14:55 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>
>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mto39a$9f0$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>>>news:mtnnaf$n8t$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>
>>>Funny that you removed the following from your reply as if I wouldn't
>>>notice.  <G>
>>
>> I have no idea whether those are more 4 hour kookvids, some sort of parody
>> or paranoia-soaked ravings that "Back to the Future" movies somehow
>> predicted 9/11, but I am not curious enough to look. URLs were deleted
>> unwatched.
>
>ROTFLMAO because there was clearly no prediction whatsoever in Back to the 
>Future.  It is sort of like this video:
>
>9-11 ON CLOCKS IN OVER A DOZEN MOVIES SINCE THE 60s !!! & Live Moment Planes 
>Hit Towers
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtNBgxS04Uc
>
>Don't forget that the group of people that had CGIs added to videos of Nuke 
>York City could also make movies about Nuke York City ahead of time so that 
>is what they did.  DUH.
>

     No CGIs were used. You've helped me to PROVE this.

>Put back in again for someone that spends so much time denying the evidence.
>
>And do not forget about the following videos because somebody was clearly
>trying to tell us something.  And do not forget in the video Doc Brown was
>dealing with Nuclear Terrorist and on top of that even Muslim Terrorist.
><G>
>

     I don't recall the religion of the characters being mentioned. I
think you're falling victim to your own anti-Muslim bigotry. But I
will examine any and all evidence you present for your claim.

>BACK TO THE FUTURE predicts 9/11
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ULjJ3EqyY
>
>JFK and 9/11 in Back to the Future - Hidden Messages In Plain Sight
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFM02ItYKbY
>
>Back To the FUTURE 3: DECODED ? 1990 is 11 Years To 9/11
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB641NgMMZ0
>
>Back to the Future Movie Decoded FULL VERSION
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_P_wLBxpYE
>
>And you can find even more if you go to:
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+back+to+the+future
>
>========================================================
>
>Given that everything else points to the use of nukes in Nuke York City 

     Nothing points to the use of nukes in NYC. You've helped me to
PROVE none were used.

>including the sudden shaking of the North Tower, why Ground Zero was really 
>Ground Zero and the fact that seismic reading can be tainted you might want 
>to watch the following video if you can not watch any of the other videos 
>above:
>
>9-11 ON CLOCKS IN OVER A DOZEN MOVIES SINCE THE 60s !!! & Live Moment Planes 
>Hit Towers
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtNBgxS04Uc
>

     I imagine that if I devoted the time, I could find 6:02 in over a
dozen movies since the 60s. It won't mean anything, of course.


"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]

#522531

On 21/09/2015 04:11, Rocky wrote:
> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
> news:mtnnaf$n8t$2@pcls7.std.com...
>
> Funny that you removed the following from your reply as if I wouldn't
> notice.  <G>
>
> And do not forget about the following videos because somebody was clearly
> trying to tell us something.  And do not forget in the video Doc Brown was
> dealing with Nuclear Terrorist and on top of that even Muslim Terrorist.
> <G>
>
> BACK TO THE FUTURE predicts 9/11
>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ULjJ3EqyY
>
> JFK and 9/11 in Back to the Future - Hidden Messages In Plain Sight
>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFM02ItYKbY
>
> Back To the FUTURE 3: DECODED ? 1990 is 11 Years To 9/11
>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB641NgMMZ0
>
> Back to the Future Movie Decoded FULL VERSION
>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_P_wLBxpYE
>
> And you can find even more if you go to:
>   https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+back+to+the+future
>
>


Why did you remove most of his post, was the content embarrassing to you?



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

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

#522552

"Tony Dragon" <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> wrote in message 
news:mtpl4q$af2$3@dont-email.me...
> On 21/09/2015 04:11, Rocky wrote:
>> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
>> news:mtnnaf$n8t$2@pcls7.std.com...
>>
>> Funny that you removed the following from your reply as if I wouldn't
>> notice.  <G>
>>
>> And do not forget about the following videos because somebody was clearly
>> trying to tell us something.  And do not forget in the video Doc Brown 
>> was
>> dealing with Nuclear Terrorist and on top of that even Muslim Terrorist.
>> <G>
>>
>> BACK TO THE FUTURE predicts 9/11
>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ULjJ3EqyY
>>
>> JFK and 9/11 in Back to the Future - Hidden Messages In Plain Sight
>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFM02ItYKbY
>>
>> Back To the FUTURE 3: DECODED ? 1990 is 11 Years To 9/11
>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB641NgMMZ0
>>
>> Back to the Future Movie Decoded FULL VERSION
>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_P_wLBxpYE
>>
>> And you can find even more if you go to:
>>   https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+back+to+the+future
>>
>>
>
>
> Why did you remove most of his post, was the content embarrassing to you?

I already replied to that part of the post.  I also wanted to point out the 
stuff that he removed from his reply mr T-ANNOY. 

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web