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

Groups > sci.physics > #520597 > unrolled thread

Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-12 21:34 -0500
    Re: Rocky still batshit crazy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 04:14 +0000
      Re: Rocky still batshit crazy "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 07:32 -0400
        Re: Rocky still batshit crazy BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-13 10:22 -0400
          Re: Rocky still batshit crazy "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 10:28 -0400
            Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 09:49 -0500
            Re: Rocky still batshit crazy "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:44 -0500
              Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  (Kid caught in a BIG LIE) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 14:00 -0500
                Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  (Kid caught in a BIG LIE) "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 19:10 -0400
                  Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  (Kid caught in a BIG LIE) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 18:27 -0500
                Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  (Kid caught in a BIG LIE) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:18 -0500
                  Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  ( Kid caught running from his BIG LIE ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 07:34 -0500
                    Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Kid caught running from his BIG LIE ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-14 17:35 +0000
                      Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in a BIG LIE ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 12:50 -0500
                        Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in a BIG LIE ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-14 18:49 +0000
                          Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in BIG LIEs ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 14:13 -0500
                            Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in BIG LIEs ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-14 19:50 +0000
                              Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in BIG LIEs ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 15:24 -0500
                                Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in BIG LIEs ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-15 16:05 +0000
                            Re: Rocky's delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 21:09 +0000
                            Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in BIG LIEs ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-15 15:42 +0000
                      Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 13:30 -0500
                        Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-14 19:17 +0000
                          Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 14:33 -0500
                            Re: Rocky's delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 21:14 +0000
                          Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 14:55 -0500
                            Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 15:01 -0500
                    Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  ( Kid caught running from his BIG LIE ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:35 -0500
                      Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  ( Kid caught trying to run from his BIG LIEs ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 18:45 -0500
                        Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  (Roger is caught lying yet again. Or is that still?) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 04:11 -0500
                          Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  (Kid is caught lying yet again. Or is that still?) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 16:16 -0500
                            Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  (Kid is caught lying yet again. Or is that still?) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:42 -0500
                    Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers  ( Kid caught running from his BIG LIE ) "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 07:05 -0400
              Re: Rocky still batshit crazy "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 19:02 -0400
                Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 18:23 -0500
                  Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-13 19:46 -0400
                  Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 00:22 -0400
                    Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 23:51 -0500
                      Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 13:49 -0400
                        Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 12:59 -0500
            Re: Rocky still batshit crazy BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-14 09:54 -0400
              Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Now The 9/11 Hijacker Hoax Movie blunders ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 09:16 -0500
          Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 09:40 -0500
            Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:44 -0500
              Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 14:05 -0500
                Re: Ping FFN and jimp:  Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:19 -0500

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#521289 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Michael caught in BIG LIEs )

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

>And AGAIN if the following was not done by deep underground nukes then how 
>was it done where a building could collapse, not crush the survivors in 
>floors 2-6 of stairwell B, leave free standing walls and not end up in the 
>basement either?

It was simply a slightly offcenter collapse and some really, really really
good luck that spared the stairway from being crushed.

There was nothing magic about the lobby floor that would have withstood
the collapsing mass of 110 stories of building!  As the collapsing mass
smashed its way through the 4th, 3rd, 2nd floors it would have smashed its
way through the lobby and then the subbasement floors with nothing to stop
it until it reached the bedrock at the bottom of the bathtub.  That
picture you keep linking to proves it:
> http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/blast3.jpeg
as it shows the debris compacted to 70-80 feet, which is right for 110
floors of 95% air, and that 70-80 feet of rubble reaches close to street
level.  The standing exterior walls and Stairwell B remained standing
because they were short enough to stand on their own (and the exterior
walls were very strong on the lower levels) and by sheer luck avoided
being hit by anything large enough to crush them.

>And don't forget their was a way to set off nukes without leaving a seismic 
>record and that was to have the cavities already there.

Now you are making things up.  Complete bullshit.  You simply cannot
explain how three nukes could be detonated without generating three 5.5
magnitude earthquakes, each with the distinctive nuclear signature, that
would have been detected throughout the whole world.

>And your bullshit about the radiation was faced with the fact they didn't 
>test the soil samples at GZ and they certainly didn't take the samples from 
>anywhere near where the haze in the following photo is either.

They tested for radiation before the buildings fell.  As soon as they 
figured out it was a terrorist attack they tested for radiation, because
they know that a "dirty bomb" type attack would be a favorite of 
terrorists, and would be very, very bad for NYC.  No unusual radiation
was detected, and that rules out any sort of nuclear devices.

>This will give you a list of videos that show that some people replaced a
>CGI of a jet with a CGI of a ball instead.
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+the+ball

Why do you keep posting a link to overly compressed, overly shrunken
videos that prove nothing except excessive shrinkage and compression loses
detail from videos?

>> Yup. He plots it coming in _dead level_ and wonders where it was when he
>> extrapolates its position back in time coming in dead level with the
>> impact level.  That's because he didn't look up.  Of course he couldn't
>> look up, the camera didn't look up.  It was focusing on the North Tower,
>> not looking for a second plane.

>Even if you took it up a few degrees it would still be in the wide shot you 
>idiot.

Nope.  I plotted it against that video just before the first zoom in.

>Why don't you just take a protractor and see how steep the dive would have 
>to be not to be in the wide shot?

Why not do it yourself?  Oh, that's right, you flunked math and don't
know how.

>>>9/11 PLANE WING DISAPPEARS AS IT HITS TRADE CENTER TOWER! CGI HOLOGRAM?
>>
>> MPEG artifact, most likely.  What was the make/model of that videocamera
>> and what method does it use for video compression?

>ROTFLMAO because to this date the only person that could recreate that 
>anomaly was someone using a 3D program and having the wings reflect the sky. 

How could they reproduce it without the exact same camera filming the 
exact same scene so that the camera will compress it the exact same way?

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

#521101 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot )

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mt70hh$pqr$2@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>We were talking about the accuracy of your bullshit that you used to deny
>>the fact the CGI should have been in the wide shot idiot.  Because the
>>person that made the claim in the above video proved the jet should have
>>been in the wide shot in that same video you idiot.
>
> The jet was likely off the screen at the time of the wide angle shot
> because it was ABOVE the field of view of the shot.  UA 175 was not flying
> level, it was making a power dive during its last five minutes, descending
> at between 5000-10,000 feet per minute.

Ok, so I looked up the Flight 175 flight path and it appears you not right 
because it should have still been in the wide angle shot.  Here see for 
yourself

United Airlines Flight 175 Reconstruction with ATC Recording - September 11 
2001
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiIcDFralwc

9/11 and Media Fakery
 http://fakemedia911.blogspot.com/2013/04/911-plane-speed.html


> Regardless, hundreds if not thousands of video cameras were fixed on the
> World Trade Center at that time.  They all recorded a jet crashing into
> the South Tower.  Thousands of New Yorkers staring at the towers saw that
> as well.  As did millions of people watching TV news, who saw it *live*.
> That makes it quite certain that a jet crashed into the South Tower.
> Arguing that a minor question with one of the thousand videos when the
> others (and that one as well) showed a jet crash into the South Tower is
> insane nitpicking.

Don't forget all they needed to mass produce hundreds if not thousands of 
fake videos is a 3D layout of Nuke York City, a flight path for the CGI and 
a synchronization flash and they even left the synchronization flash in a 
lot of the faked videos.

And certainly you know about stacking cards.  If there were no jets just 
what would the media have to do?  They would have to stack the cards in 
their favor because there are also plenty of people and videos that never 
saw the CGI in real life.

This will give you a list of videos that show that some people replaced a
CGI of a jet with a CGI of a ball instead.
 https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+the+ball

9/11 no planes compilation - interesting!
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BswpAgwBNEw

07 - The Key
 https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?list=PLEA05F393EC843D80

And do not forget what NIST did when questioned about why three buildings 
feel so fast.  They claimed it was beyond the scope of their investigation 
yet that should have been the most important part of their investigation.

Rocky

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

#521112 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot )

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

>> The jet was likely off the screen at the time of the wide angle shot
>> because it was ABOVE the field of view of the shot.  UA 175 was not flying
>> level, it was making a power dive during its last five minutes, descending
>> at between 5000-10,000 feet per minute.

>Ok, so I looked up the Flight 175 flight path and it appears you not right 
>because it should have still been in the wide angle shot.  Here see for 
>yourself

>United Airlines Flight 175 Reconstruction with ATC Recording - September 11 
>2001
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiIcDFralwc

No altitude info.  But it still looks like a steep descent.  BTW at 10,000
feet descent per minute the flight would be a mile up 30 seconds before
impact.

>Don't forget all they needed to mass produce hundreds if not thousands of 
>fake videos is a 3D layout of Nuke York City, a flight path for the CGI and 
>a synchronization flash and they even left the synchronization flash in a 
>lot of the faked videos.

And just how do the do that to all the eyeballs of the thousands of New
Yorkers staring at the burning tower?  How do they access all those
thousands of video recorders?  How do they do that in real time, to
however many TV stations who were broadcasting live at that moment, to
fool millions?

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

#521117 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot )

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mt76gf$5n9$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>> The jet was likely off the screen at the time of the wide angle shot
>>> because it was ABOVE the field of view of the shot.  UA 175 was not 
>>> flying
>>> level, it was making a power dive during its last five minutes, 
>>> descending
>>> at between 5000-10,000 feet per minute.
>
>>Ok, so I looked up the Flight 175 flight path and it appears you not right
>>because it should have still been in the wide angle shot.  Here see for
>>yourself
>
>>United Airlines Flight 175 Reconstruction with ATC Recording - September 
>>11
>>2001
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiIcDFralwc
>
> No altitude info.  But it still looks like a steep descent.  BTW at 10,000
> feet descent per minute the flight would be a mile up 30 seconds before
> impact.

And they were over 5 miles away with the wide shot.  And given the videos at 
that time were 4x3 they had a lot of upward visibility.  Plus the banner in 
the upper right hand corner is not always there.  See for yourself at:
https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?t=4m4s

Again, you will need a protector and the angle of decent for the alleged 
flight 175 if you really think you are right.  <G>

9/11 and Media Fakery
 http://fakemedia911.blogspot.com/2013/04/911-plane-speed.html


>>Don't forget all they needed to mass produce hundreds if not thousands of
>>fake videos is a 3D layout of Nuke York City, a flight path for the CGI 
>>and
>>a synchronization flash and they even left the synchronization flash in a
>>lot of the faked videos.
>
> And just how do the do that to all the eyeballs of the thousands of New
> Yorkers staring at the burning tower?  How do they access all those
> thousands of video recorders?  How do they do that in real time, to
> however many TV stations who were broadcasting live at that moment, to
> fool millions?

We have been over this.  Crisis Actors were used for the bogus witnesses and 
CGIs were used for the media hoax and you have yet to give me a angle of 
decent to try and prove the wide shot could have missed the CGI.   <G>

And do not forget at this time nobody with the exception of Dimitri has been 
able to explain why the Twin Towers appeared to collapse, didn't crush the 
Survivors in floors 2-6, didn't end up in the basement and at the same time 
leave free standing walls that were 8 floors high.  <G>

And do not forget the bullshit NIST gave people that asked too many 
questions.  NIST would say that was beyond the scope of their investigation. 
And who limited NIST's investigation?  DUH.

Rocky 

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

#521147 — Re: Rocky's delusions

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> 
> We have been over this.  Crisis Actors were used for the bogus witnesses and 
> CGIs were used for the media hoax and you have yet to give me a angle of 
> decent to try and prove the wide shot could have missed the CGI.

Right, the thousands of people that would normally be in the area were
all magically replaced by "Crisis Actors".

This is totally insane, kook.

So where were the thousands of people that would have been in the area
if they were replaced with "Crisis Actors", raving kook?


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#521120 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot )

"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
news:mt76gf$5n9$1@pcls7.std.com...
> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>
>>> The jet was likely off the screen at the time of the wide angle shot
>>> because it was ABOVE the field of view of the shot.  UA 175 was not 
>>> flying
>>> level, it was making a power dive during its last five minutes, 
>>> descending
>>> at between 5000-10,000 feet per minute.
>
>>Ok, so I looked up the Flight 175 flight path and it appears you not right
>>because it should have still been in the wide angle shot.  Here see for
>>yourself
>
>>United Airlines Flight 175 Reconstruction with ATC Recording - September 
>>11
>>2001
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiIcDFralwc
>
> No altitude info.  But it still looks like a steep descent.  BTW at 10,000
> feet descent per minute the flight would be a mile up 30 seconds before
> impact.

ROTFLMAO because it will be a waste of your time to try and validate your 
bullshit since there are other videos that prove the rate of decent of the 
alleged Flight 175 videos was not consistent among the faked videos.  And I 
think that is in the following video:

Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U

It is the video where the alleged Flight 175 goes behind a building and then 
next thing we know it is flying level with shots that where taken at the 
exact same time have it level the entire time.

Again, "The Great 9/11 Hijacker Hoax" had so many movie blunders it is 
impossible for you to lie about them all even though you are trying.  <G>

Rocky 

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

#521122 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( More on Michael's BIG LIE about the wide shot )

"Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote in message 
news:u6CdneEMi__eu2rInZ2dnUU7-K-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
> news:mt76gf$5n9$1@pcls7.std.com...
>> "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> writes:
>>
>>>> The jet was likely off the screen at the time of the wide angle shot
>>>> because it was ABOVE the field of view of the shot.  UA 175 was not 
>>>> flying
>>>> level, it was making a power dive during its last five minutes, 
>>>> descending
>>>> at between 5000-10,000 feet per minute.
>>
>>>Ok, so I looked up the Flight 175 flight path and it appears you not 
>>>right
>>>because it should have still been in the wide angle shot.  Here see for
>>>yourself
>>
>>>United Airlines Flight 175 Reconstruction with ATC Recording - September 
>>>11
>>>2001
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiIcDFralwc
>>
>> No altitude info.  But it still looks like a steep descent.  BTW at 
>> 10,000
>> feet descent per minute the flight would be a mile up 30 seconds before
>> impact.
>
> ROTFLMAO because it will be a waste of your time to try and validate your 
> bullshit since there are other videos that prove the rate of decent of the 
> alleged Flight 175 videos was not consistent among the faked videos.  And 
> I think that is in the following video:
>
> Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U
>
> It is the video where the alleged Flight 175 goes behind a building and 
> then next thing we know it is flying level with shots that where taken at 
> the exact same time have it level the entire time.
>
> Again, "The Great 9/11 Hijacker Hoax" had so many movie blunders it is 
> impossible for you to lie about them all even though you are trying.  <G>
>
> Rocky

Check out 21:50 of the above video to see the rate of decent changes from 
faked video to faked video.  <G>

and

This will give you a list of videos that show that some people replaced a
CGI of a jet with a CGI of a ball instead.
 https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+the+ball

And some places didn't even bother to put a CGI in their videos:

9/11 no planes compilation - interesting!
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BswpAgwBNEw

9/11 was a big lie, and the media showed us a poorly made film.

Rocky 

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

#521178 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Kid caught running from his BIG LIE )

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 07:34:03 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:a74dvap8mfbmms5qtou2jgrqdphaqndlrj@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 14:00:01 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:bvgbval9h2609i03uq1k2m4kes2dkr92hg@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for the
>>>>>> ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who 
>>>>>would
>>>>>rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>>
>>>>>But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can 
>>>>>actually
>>>>>disprove.
>>>>>Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>>>count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>
>>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>>>the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>>>you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to be
>>>>the truth?
>>>
>>>And what about you when you were faced with the fact that there was no jet
>>>in the wide shot by Chopper 5.  See:
>>>
>>>>07 - The Key
>>>>( indexed to start at 4:04 )
>>>> https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?t=4m4s
>>>
>>>You came up with the stupid remark of:  "Do you have any idea how much 
>>>area
>>>a plane traveling between 300 and 500 MPH covers?"
>>>
>>>And all  you really had to do to see how big your bullshit was was to keep
>>>watching that video because after they showed the missing jet they showed
>>>what a big liar a person just like you was.  <G>
>>
>>     How does this prove Bast's position about the accuracy of the
>> video s/he linked to above? Be specific.
>
>We were talking about the accuracy of your bullshit that you used to deny 
>the fact the CGI should have been in the wide shot idiot.  Because the 
>person that made the claim in the above video proved the jet should have 
>been in the wide shot in that same video you idiot.
>

     If you're going to lie, and you are, DO NOT leave the undeniable
PROOF that you're lying in the post. As can be seen, Bast and I were
discussing his/her claim that what was presented in the has been
verified accurate and his/her claim that BDK must disprove the items
mentioned in the video.
     If you'll lie about something so easy to PROVE a lie, there is no
reason anyone should accept any claim you make as valid.

[snip more of your lying]

     Get the professional mental health care you NEED.

"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 claims nukes were used on
9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>

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

#521192 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Kid caught trying to run from his BIG LIEs )

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:3emevahp3umio0292rbk7q271vhck6oi6l@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 07:34:03 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>     If you're going to lie,

ROTFLMAO because you have no option but to lie and lie and lie because that 
is what you have to do to support the lies of the 9/11 hoaxsters.

I've already stated what the 9/11 perpetrators needed to make thousand of 
bogus videos and they overlooked one thing.  They were not expecting a crane 
to be in a video so when they added their CGI to one particular video they 
fcuked up.

Here see for yourself:  <G>

Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
 https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s

You are a liar Kid Wills and you will always be one as long as you have been 
fooled by the crap from the 9/11 hoaxsters.

Rocky 

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

#521237 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers (Roger is caught lying yet again. Or is that still?)

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 18:45:53 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>>>news:a74dvap8mfbmms5qtou2jgrqdphaqndlrj@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 14:00:01 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:bvgbval9h2609i03uq1k2m4kes2dkr92hg@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for the
>>>>>>>> ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who 
>>>>>>>would rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can 
>>>>>>>actually disprove.
>>>>>>>Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>>>>>count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>>>>>the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>>>>>you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to be
>>>>>>the truth?
>>>>>
>>>>>And what about you when you were faced with the fact that there was no jet
>>>>>in the wide shot by Chopper 5.  See:
>>>>>
>>>>>>07 - The Key
>>>>>>( indexed to start at 4:04 )
>>>>>> https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?t=4m4s
>>>>>
>>>>>You came up with the stupid remark of:  "Do you have any idea how much 
>>>>>area
>>>>>a plane traveling between 300 and 500 MPH covers?"
>>>>>
>>>>>And all  you really had to do to see how big your bullshit was was to keep
>>>>>watching that video because after they showed the missing jet they showed
>>>>>what a big liar a person just like you was.  <G>
>>>>
>>>>     How does this prove Bast's position about the accuracy of the
>>>> video s/he linked to above? Be specific.
>>>
>>>We were talking about the accuracy of your bullshit that you used to deny 
>>>the fact the CGI should have been in the wide shot idiot.  Because the 
>>>person that made the claim in the above video proved the jet should have 
>>>been in the wide shot in that same video you idiot.
>>
>>     If you're going to lie, and you are, DO NOT leave the undeniable
>>PROOF that you're lying in the post. As can be seen, Bast and I were
>>discussing his/her claim that what was presented in the has been
>>verified accurate and his/her claim that BDK must disprove the items
>>mentioned in the video.
>>     If you'll lie about something so easy to PROVE a lie, there is no
>>reason anyone should accept any claim you make as valid.
>>
>>[snip more of your lying]
>>
>>     Get the professional mental health care you NEED.
>
>ROTFLMAO because you have no option but to lie and lie and lie because that 
>is what you have to do to support the lies of the 9/11 hoaxsters.

     Where, in reality, have I lied? The undeniable PROOF that you
lied is seen above. 
     You can remove it again if you need to continue lying. But do so
knowing I'll simply replace the parts your mental defects compelled
you to remove to try and hide your lying.

>
>I've already stated what the 9/11 perpetrators needed to make thousand of 
>bogus videos and they overlooked one thing.  They were not expecting a crane 
>to be in a video so when they added their CGI to one particular video they 
>fcuked up.
>

     And yet, there are over one million eye witnesses who saw it live
and in person. Either they were telling the truth, or the government
spent BILLIONS on those phantom crisis actors you LIE and claim were
present.

>Here see for yourself:  <G>
>
>Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
>( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
> https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s
>
>You are a liar Kid Wills and you will always be one as long as you have been 
>fooled by the crap from the 9/11 hoaxsters.
>

     Once again you've been reduced to LYING to claim I've lied.
What's most sad is that it appears you honestly believe your lying
would work.

"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]

#521877 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers (Kid is caught lying yet again. Or is that still?)

"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:e4ofva151ducicncsal6ftngkcj5v20ou8@4ax.com...
>
>     Where, in reality, have I lied?

Hang on don't go anywhere. . .

>     And yet, there are over one million eye witnesses who saw it live
> and in person.

Oh gee, wasn't that fast?  I caught you in a big lie already.  <G>

Don't forget when the napalm went off in the South Tower both ABC and FOX 
were talking to eye witnesses that didn't see or hear a jet.  Pretty funny 
huh?

And just like with the Pentagon don't worry about what the eye or lie 
witnesses saw what did you see?  You didn't see squat because there was 
nothing to see until the FBI got there and moved things from a van for a 
photo op.

BTW you will have to preference your Message ID below with "news:" the way I 
do it above you clown.

Fact is even on 9/11 the news was pissing people off because they tried to 
get them to lie twice about a jet and that frustrated one woman in 
particular and maybe more.

Nope, the stories we hear on the Prime Time Sci-Fi flick about hijacked jets 
were just stories and I know you really wanted to think there was a crash 
but there wasn't it was all made up for clowns like you.  <G>

>>Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
>>( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
>> https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s

> Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>

Your link is so stupid because it is just a link to another link when you 
could just link to the page instead.

Gaud you are one crazy clown if you say millions of people saw in jet in 
Nuke York City when you can't name one by name.

Me, I can certainly name one of the lie-witnesses to the Pentagon because 
Mike Walter had to change his story after his first story was not consistent 
with the facts and now his second story is not consistent with a 757.  <G>

Rocky 

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

#521967 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers (Kid is caught lying yet again. Or is that still?)

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 16:16:04 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:



The context that causes you to soil yourself in fear has been
restored.



>"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:e4ofva151ducicncsal6ftngkcj5v20ou8@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for the
>>>>>>>>>> ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who 
>>>>>>>>>would rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can 
>>>>>>>>>actually disprove.
>>>>>>>>>Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>>>>>>>count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>>>>>>>the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>>>>>>>you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to be
>>>>>>>>the truth?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And what about you when you were faced with the fact that there was no jet
>>>>>>>in the wide shot by Chopper 5.  See:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>07 - The Key
>>>>>>>>( indexed to start at 4:04 )
>>>>>>>> https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?t=4m4s
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You came up with the stupid remark of:  "Do you have any idea how much 
>>>>>>>area a plane traveling between 300 and 500 MPH covers?"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And all  you really had to do to see how big your bullshit was was to keep
>>>>>>>watching that video because after they showed the missing jet they showed
>>>>>>>what a big liar a person just like you was.  <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     How does this prove Bast's position about the accuracy of the
>>>>>> video s/he linked to above? Be specific.
>>>>>
>>>>>We were talking about the accuracy of your bullshit that you used to deny 
>>>>>the fact the CGI should have been in the wide shot idiot.  Because the 
>>>>>person that made the claim in the above video proved the jet should have 
>>>>>been in the wide shot in that same video you idiot.
>>>>
>>>>     If you're going to lie, and you are, DO NOT leave the undeniable
>>>>PROOF that you're lying in the post. As can be seen, Bast and I were
>>>>discussing his/her claim that what was presented in the has been
>>>>verified accurate and his/her claim that BDK must disprove the items
>>>>mentioned in the video.
>>>>     If you'll lie about something so easy to PROVE a lie, there is no
>>>>reason anyone should accept any claim you make as valid.
>>>>
>>>>[snip more of your lying]
>>>>
>>>>     Get the professional mental health care you NEED.
>>>
>>>ROTFLMAO because you have no option but to lie and lie and lie because that 
>>>is what you have to do to support the lies of the 9/11 hoaxsters.
>>
>>     Where, in reality, have I lied? The undeniable PROOF that you
>>lied is seen above. 
>>     You can remove it again if you need to continue lying. But do so
>>knowing I'll simply replace the parts your mental defects compelled
>>you to remove to try and hide your lying.
>
>Hang on don't go anywhere. . .
>

     OK.

>>     And yet, there are over one million eye witnesses who saw it live
>>and in person. Either they were telling the truth, or the government
>>spent BILLIONS on those phantom crisis actors you LIE and claim were
>>present.
>
>Oh gee, wasn't that fast?  I caught you in a big lie already.  <G>
>

     So the government did spend billions on crisis actors?
     Bwahahahahahahaha!

>Don't forget when the napalm went off in the South Tower both ABC and FOX 
>were talking to eye witnesses that didn't see or hear a jet.  Pretty funny 
>huh?
>

     There was no napalm. You are still free to prove your claim that
there was.
     I've not seen the interview(s) you mention. I think you're lying,
but I will give an honest examination of the evidence you present.

>And just like with the Pentagon don't worry about what the eye or lie 
>witnesses saw what did you see?  You didn't see squat because there was 
>nothing to see until the FBI got there and moved things from a van for a 
>photo op.
>

     I didn't see squat because I was in Iowa. I wasn't at the
Pentagon when the plane hit it. DUH.

>BTW you will have to preference your Message ID below with "news:" the way I 
>do it above you clown.
>

     That's not the proper way to post the MID. Doing it that way will
bring up an error with any real news reader, stupid.

>Fact is even on 9/11 the news was pissing people off because they tried to 
>get them to lie twice about a jet and that frustrated one woman in 
>particular and maybe more.
>

     What woman is that?

>Nope, the stories we hear on the Prime Time Sci-Fi flick about hijacked jets 
>were just stories and I know you really wanted to think there was a crash 
>but there wasn't it was all made up for clowns like you.  <G>
>

     And yet, 100% of the available evidence is in direct opposition
to your delusions. Odd that.

>>>Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
>>>( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
>>> https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s
>>>
>>>I've already stated what the 9/11 perpetrators needed to make thousand of 
>>>bogus videos and they overlooked one thing.  They were not expecting a crane 
>>>to be in a video so when they added their CGI to one particular video they 
>>>fcuked up.
>>
>>
>>>Here see for yourself:  <G>
>>>
>>>Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
>>>( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
>>> https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s
>>>
>>>You are a liar Kid Wills and you will always be one as long as you have been 
>>>fooled by the crap from the 9/11 hoaxsters.
>>>
>>
>>     Once again you've been reduced to LYING to claim I've lied.
>>What's most sad is that it appears you honestly believe your lying
>>would work.
>>
>> Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>
>Your link is so stupid because it is just a link to another link when you 
>could just link to the page instead.
>

     It links to your post from 9/14/2015. That you're too stupid (I
wish that were an insult) to understand that you posted it is your
issue to address, not mine.

>Gaud you are one crazy clown if you say millions of people saw in jet in 
>Nuke York City when you can't name one by name.
>

     Millions of people were focused on the towers when the second
plane hit. 

>Me, I can certainly name one of the lie-witnesses to the Pentagon because 
>Mike Walter had to change his story after his first story was not consistent 
>with the facts and now his second story is not consistent with a 757.  <G>

     He didn't change his story. You've linked to a video where he
points this out himself.

"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]

#521623 — Re: Ping FFN and jimp: Tell me some bullshit about what remained of the Twin Towers ( Kid caught running from his BIG LIE )

Rocky wrote:
> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a74dvap8mfbmms5qtou2jgrqdphaqndlrj@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 14:00:01 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:bvgbval9h2609i03uq1k2m4kes2dkr92hg@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for
>>>>>> the ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who
>>>>> would
>>>>> rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can
>>>>> actually
>>>>> disprove.
>>>>> Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>>> count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>>> the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>>> you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to
>>>> be the truth?
>>>
>>> And what about you when you were faced with the fact that there was
>>> no jet in the wide shot by Chopper 5.  See:
>>>
>>>> 07 - The Key
>>>> ( indexed to start at 4:04 )
>>>> https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?t=4m4s
>>>
>>> You came up with the stupid remark of:  "Do you have any idea how much
>>> area
>>> a plane traveling between 300 and 500 MPH covers?"
>>>
>>> And all  you really had to do to see how big your bullshit was was to
>>> keep watching that video because after they showed the missing jet
>>> they showed what a big liar a person just like you was.  <G>
>>
>>     How does this prove Bast's position about the accuracy of the
>> video s/he linked to above? Be specific.
>
> We were talking about the accuracy of your bullshit that you used to
> deny the fact the CGI should have been in the wide shot idiot.  Because
> the person that made the claim in the above video proved the jet should
> have been in the wide shot in that same video you idiot.
>
> Not only was your BS already taken care of in the above video but even
> math proves the jet would not have disappeared from view by using a
> zoom out because the jet was way too big in the narrow shot.  <G>
>
> BTW according to the following Live Free or Die Hard (2007) had 104
> movie mistakes.
> http://www.moviemistakes.com/film6823
>
> The Prime Time 9/11 hijacker's movie also had a bunch of movie mistakes
> and that was the easiest way to see it was just a movie from day one.
>
> So in other words your complete failure to catch any of the 9/11 the
> prime time movie mistakes ended up making you a total idiot.
>
> Now talking about the 9/11 Prime Time Hijacker Movie mistakes see:
>
> 9/11 and Media Fakery
> http://fakemedia911.blogspot.com/2013/04/911-plane-speed.html
>
> Or this one:
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9%2F11+the+ball
>
> Or this one:
> 9/11 PLANE WING DISAPPEARS AS IT HITS TRADE CENTER TOWER! CGI HOLOGRAM?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL_x9NsxJlg
>
> Or this one:
> 07 - The Key
> https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds?list=PLEA05F393EC843D80
>
> Or this one:
> 9/11 no planes compilation - interesting!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BswpAgwBNEw
>
> Or this one:
> Steve Grage & James Easton's PHYSICS 9/11 - THE NO PLANES MOVIE
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1D1C94eE8U
>
> Or this one:
> Believe Your Own Eyes - 9/11 - No "Planes" Were Ever Used.mp4
> ( Time indexed to start at 25:58 )
> https://youtu.be/IL8cJWyOxWQ?t=25m58s
>
> Oh, and I can't forget this media fcukup
> 9/11 Pentagon Reality Check 16: CNN's JAMIE MCINTYRE
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHeYFTPG4KQ
>
> Ad oddly enough I think I heard Jamie Mcintyre say that on TV and that
> changed my mind from thinking we were lied to about the Pentagon to
> knowing we were lied to about the Pentagon.
>
> Or this media fcuk up by the BBC:
> 9/11 BBC World News Reports World Trade Center Tower 7 Collapse Before
> it Happens
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yx4p9pUREZ8
>
> Keep in mind Jane Stanley in the above video was claiming that WTC7
> collapsed but you can see WTC7 standing behind her.
>
> "9/11 was a big lie, and the media showed us a poorly made film."




Yup, they couldn't even fake losing a satellite feed properly after someone 
in the control room realized that WTC 7 was still showing over her shoulder.
As most people now get digital feeds, they know all the fancy colors the 
screen goes as the signal fades away.

I'm guessing the brits just goofed up on the time zone conversion, and aired 
their scripted broadcast that WTC 7 fell,....An HOUR TOO EARLY.

The problem that day is that every TV station was looking at what the others 
were doing.
So even CNN started claiming WTC 7 had fallen, even though it still was 
standing, and they never verified it.

.....How do you forecast, a totally unforeseen catastrophic collapse   ????

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

#520845 — Re: Rocky still batshit crazy

K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:28:21 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> BDK wrote:
>>> In article <mt3mpc$cdq$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, and isn't it funny how that haze comes from where three deep
>>>>>> underground nukes were detonated?  <G>
>>>>>
>>>>> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>>>>>
>>>>> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting
>>>>> fires which weakened the central support columns and the buildings
>>>>> collapesed almost 2 hours later.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of
>>>>> the western side and one of them crashed into a field in
>>>>> Pennsylvania.
>>>>>
>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic
>>>>> signature that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
>>>>> collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the
>>>>> Pentagon and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.
>>>>>
>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>>>> 9/11.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everything else is kook babble.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you found a job yet, delusional, bat shit crazy, stalker?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>
>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>
>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for the
>>> ridiculous claims made in it.
>>
>>
>>
>> You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who
>> would rather live happly with a lie.
>>
>> But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can
>> actually disprove.
>> Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>> count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>
>
>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
> the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
> you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to be
> the truth?






If you watched the video,....he does nothing BUT provide proof.
But that's okay,.....I know you will refuse to believe it anyway.

However, I do not really post and provide links for you.
They are here for those lurkers who want to know the facts about 9/11 to 
view.

Right now, they are deciding on their own that accepting a government lie is 
not an option any more. 

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

#520854

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
news:mt4v6c$b7u$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:28:21 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> BDK wrote:
>>>> In article <mt3mpc$cdq$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid
>>>> says...
>>>>>
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, and isn't it funny how that haze comes from where three deep
>>>>>>> underground nukes were detonated?  <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting
>>>>>> fires which weakened the central support columns and the buildings
>>>>>> collapesed almost 2 hours later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of
>>>>>> the western side and one of them crashed into a field in
>>>>>> Pennsylvania.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic
>>>>>> signature that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
>>>>>> collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the
>>>>>> Pentagon and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>>>>> 9/11.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Everything else is kook babble.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you found a job yet, delusional, bat shit crazy, stalker?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>
>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>
>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for the
>>>> ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who
>>> would rather live happly with a lie.
>>>
>>> But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can
>>> actually disprove.
>>> Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>> count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>
>>
>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>> the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>> you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to be
>> the truth?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If you watched the video,....he does nothing BUT provide proof.
> But that's okay,.....I know you will refuse to believe it anyway.
>
> However, I do not really post and provide links for you.
> They are here for those lurkers who want to know the facts about 9/11 to 
> view.
>
> Right now, they are deciding on their own that accepting a government lie 
> is not an option any more.

I wish there was more information about testing of deep underground nukes in 
rock because what people don't know about them is what makes it so easy for 
them to assume they operate just like above ground nukes when there is no 
flash, no massive EMP and there was a lot of shaking but for some reason 
that shaking never made it to the seismic records.

BTW as much as I hated to do it, I just added Sarah to my scratch list 
because I hate people that lie about my personal life and if Kid Wills keeps 
his lies up he will be the next thrown in a boat with jimp, the Friendly 
Neighborhood Nut and Sarah the stalker.

I can handle the lies they tell about 9/11 but the lies they tell about the 
jury trial I won 12 to 0 is going too far especially when I put everything I 
used to win that jury trial  12 to 0 without an attorney up on the Internet.

Rocky 

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

#520867

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 18:23:26 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>BTW as much as I hated to do it, I just added Sarah to my scratch list 
>because

You can't answer the questions I've posed to you.   We see what you're
doing Rocky.   Just as in every venue where you've tried to spew your
lies about 9/11 , all of us have used the truth to back you into a
corner of your lies.    

You always run away from the truth.   And we always catch you at it.  

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

#520939

Rocky wrote:
> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
> news:mt4v6c$b7u$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:28:21 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> BDK wrote:
>>>>> In article <mt3mpc$cdq$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid
>>>>> says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh, and isn't it funny how that haze comes from where three deep
>>>>>>>> underground nukes were detonated?  <G>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting
>>>>>>> fires which weakened the central support columns and the buildings
>>>>>>> collapesed almost 2 hours later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse
>>>>>>> of the western side and one of them crashed into a field in
>>>>>>> Pennsylvania.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic
>>>>>>> signature that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
>>>>>>> collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the
>>>>>>> Pentagon and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>>>>>> 9/11.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Everything else is kook babble.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you found a job yet, delusional, bat shit crazy, stalker?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>
>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>
>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for
>>>>> the ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who
>>>> would rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>
>>>> But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can
>>>> actually disprove.
>>>> Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>> count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>
>>>
>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>> the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>> you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to be
>>> the truth?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> If you watched the video,....he does nothing BUT provide proof.
>> But that's okay,.....I know you will refuse to believe it anyway.
>>
>> However, I do not really post and provide links for you.
>> They are here for those lurkers who want to know the facts about 9/11
>> to view.
>>
>> Right now, they are deciding on their own that accepting a government
>> lie is not an option any more.
>
> I wish there was more information about testing of deep underground
> nukes in rock because what people don't know about them is what makes
> it so easy for them to assume they operate just like above ground nukes
> when there is no flash, no massive EMP and there was a lot of shaking
> but for some reason that shaking never made it to the seismic records.
>
> Rocky






I still am not going to say I agree with your theory of a nuke being used on 
9/11
As there were many other options the perpetrators could have  used to 
achieve the same result.

BUT I will not dismiss nukes as a possibility, at this point.
As there was no chance for proper and independent testing of the debris.
Which was one of the first red flags that made me realize something about 
9/11 really stinks.

However you may find more info about "nukes in rock" if you do a search for 
"operation plowshare"

Unlike many of the posters here, who barely seem to be beyond the 
knuckle-dragging stage of evolution.
And too afraid that the truth might take away their illusion and have them 
discover how screwed-up they themselves,  and their country, really is
I am willing to consider any evidence

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

#520946

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
news:mt5hvu$ks3$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
> Rocky wrote:
>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:mt4v6c$b7u$1@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:28:21 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> BDK wrote:
>>>>>> In article <mt3mpc$cdq$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid
>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, and isn't it funny how that haze comes from where three deep
>>>>>>>>> underground nukes were detonated?  <G>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting
>>>>>>>> fires which weakened the central support columns and the buildings
>>>>>>>> collapesed almost 2 hours later.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse
>>>>>>>> of the western side and one of them crashed into a field in
>>>>>>>> Pennsylvania.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic
>>>>>>>> signature that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the
>>>>>>>> collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the
>>>>>>>> Pentagon and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on
>>>>>>>> 9/11.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Everything else is kook babble.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you found a job yet, delusional, bat shit crazy, stalker?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for
>>>>>> the ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who
>>>>> would rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can
>>>>> actually disprove.
>>>>> Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>>> count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>>> the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>>> you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to be
>>>> the truth?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you watched the video,....he does nothing BUT provide proof.
>>> But that's okay,.....I know you will refuse to believe it anyway.
>>>
>>> However, I do not really post and provide links for you.
>>> They are here for those lurkers who want to know the facts about 9/11
>>> to view.
>>>
>>> Right now, they are deciding on their own that accepting a government
>>> lie is not an option any more.
>>
>> I wish there was more information about testing of deep underground
>> nukes in rock because what people don't know about them is what makes
>> it so easy for them to assume they operate just like above ground nukes
>> when there is no flash, no massive EMP and there was a lot of shaking
>> but for some reason that shaking never made it to the seismic records.
>>
>> Rocky
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I still am not going to say I agree with your theory of a nuke being used 
> on 9/11
> As there were many other options the perpetrators could have  used to 
> achieve the same result.
>
> BUT I will not dismiss nukes as a possibility, at this point.
> As there was no chance for proper and independent testing of the debris.
> Which was one of the first red flags that made me realize something about 
> 9/11 really stinks.
>
> However you may find more info about "nukes in rock" if you do a search 
> for "operation plowshare"
>
> Unlike many of the posters here, who barely seem to be beyond the 
> knuckle-dragging stage of evolution.
> And too afraid that the truth might take away their illusion and have them 
> discover how screwed-up they themselves,  and their country, really is
> I am willing to consider any evidence

Thanks for the input and I just got done posting about some of the media 
fcukups and I forgot to mention "07 - The Key."  Oh well, maybe next time 
but there is a good video you might want to see that got me to even look 
into deep underground nukes as a possibility.

04 - Phenomena
 https://youtu.be/a3nwzX0A2GU

Or if you want to see the above video in the playlist it came from use:
 https://youtu.be/a3nwzX0A2GU?list=PLEA05F393EC843D80

Rocky

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

#521081

Rocky wrote:
> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
> news:mt5hvu$ks3$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> Rocky wrote:
>>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:mt4v6c$b7u$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:28:21 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> BDK wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <mt3mpc$cdq$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid
>>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and isn't it funny how that haze comes from where three
>>>>>>>>>> deep underground nukes were detonated?  <G>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting
>>>>>>>>> fires which weakened the central support columns and the
>>>>>>>>> buildings collapesed almost 2 hours later.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse
>>>>>>>>> of the western side and one of them crashed into a field in
>>>>>>>>> Pennsylvania.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic
>>>>>>>>> signature that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but
>>>>>>>>> the collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the
>>>>>>>>> Pentagon and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used
>>>>>>>>> on 9/11.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Everything else is kook babble.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Have you found a job yet, delusional, bat shit crazy, stalker?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for
>>>>>>> the ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who
>>>>>> would rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can
>>>>>> actually disprove.
>>>>>> Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>>>> count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>>>> the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>>>> you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to
>>>>> be the truth?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you watched the video,....he does nothing BUT provide proof.
>>>> But that's okay,.....I know you will refuse to believe it anyway.
>>>>
>>>> However, I do not really post and provide links for you.
>>>> They are here for those lurkers who want to know the facts about 9/11
>>>> to view.
>>>>
>>>> Right now, they are deciding on their own that accepting a government
>>>> lie is not an option any more.
>>>
>>> I wish there was more information about testing of deep underground
>>> nukes in rock because what people don't know about them is what makes
>>> it so easy for them to assume they operate just like above ground
>>> nukes when there is no flash, no massive EMP and there was a lot of
>>> shaking but for some reason that shaking never made it to the seismic
>>> records. Rocky
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I still am not going to say I agree with your theory of a nuke being
>> used on 9/11
>> As there were many other options the perpetrators could have  used to
>> achieve the same result.
>>
>> BUT I will not dismiss nukes as a possibility, at this point.
>> As there was no chance for proper and independent testing of the
>> debris. Which was one of the first red flags that made me realize
>> something about 9/11 really stinks.
>>
>> However you may find more info about "nukes in rock" if you do a search
>> for "operation plowshare"
>>
>> Unlike many of the posters here, who barely seem to be beyond the
>> knuckle-dragging stage of evolution.
>> And too afraid that the truth might take away their illusion and have
>> them discover how screwed-up they themselves,  and their country,
>> really is I am willing to consider any evidence
>
> Thanks for the input and I just got done posting about some of the media
> fcukups and I forgot to mention "07 - The Key."  Oh well, maybe next
> time but there is a good video you might want to see that got me to
> even look into deep underground nukes as a possibility.
>
> 04 - Phenomena
> https://youtu.be/a3nwzX0A2GU
>
> Or if you want to see the above video in the playlist it came from use:
> https://youtu.be/a3nwzX0A2GU?list=PLEA05F393EC843D80
>
> Rocky






The video was interesting but far too artsy to be a source of anything else 
but hypothesis.

I agree that something caused those buildings to simply vaporize, but I 
doubt is was anything like a conventional nuke that we have been taught 
about.
Of course few people even knew of the existance of thermite before 9/11.
The military may have many more directed energy weapons we minions may never 
know about

BUT we can be certain of one thing.  it would have taken something far more 
destructive than a group of rag tag camel jockey terrorists could have ever 
got a hold of on their own.

9/11 WAS and inside job. 

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

#521086

"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message 
news:mt7189$2o9$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
> Rocky wrote:
>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:mt5hvu$ks3$1@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> Rocky wrote:
>>>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:mt4v6c$b7u$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:28:21 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BDK wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <mt3mpc$cdq$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid
>>>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and isn't it funny how that haze comes from where three
>>>>>>>>>>> deep underground nukes were detonated?  <G>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The facts are some airliners were hijacked.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting
>>>>>>>>>> fires which weakened the central support columns and the
>>>>>>>>>> buildings collapesed almost 2 hours later.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse
>>>>>>>>>> of the western side and one of them crashed into a field in
>>>>>>>>>> Pennsylvania.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic
>>>>>>>>>> signature that can be detected anywhere on the planet.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but
>>>>>>>>>> the collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the
>>>>>>>>>> Pentagon and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used
>>>>>>>>>> on 9/11.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Everything else is kook babble.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have you found a job yet, delusional, bat shit crazy, stalker?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anatomy Of A Great Deception
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0Q5eZhCPuc
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A better title would be "Anatomy of a desent into kOOktardism".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just another stupid Troofer video. Only the gullible will fall for
>>>>>>>> the ridiculous claims made in it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You mean VERIFIED claims.....that will seem ridiculous to those who
>>>>>>> would rather live happly with a lie.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But, okay,...point out ONE fact mentioned in the video that you can
>>>>>>> actually disprove.
>>>>>>> Merely saying it's wrong, or resorting to insulting me, doesn't
>>>>>>> count.....Unless you are 4 years old.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     It befalls the maker of the video or his/her agent(s) to prove
>>>>>> the claims valid. It is not the burden of BDK to disprove them. Will
>>>>>> you prove them valid, or continue to prove you can't prove a lie to
>>>>>> be the truth?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you watched the video,....he does nothing BUT provide proof.
>>>>> But that's okay,.....I know you will refuse to believe it anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I do not really post and provide links for you.
>>>>> They are here for those lurkers who want to know the facts about 9/11
>>>>> to view.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now, they are deciding on their own that accepting a government
>>>>> lie is not an option any more.
>>>>
>>>> I wish there was more information about testing of deep underground
>>>> nukes in rock because what people don't know about them is what makes
>>>> it so easy for them to assume they operate just like above ground
>>>> nukes when there is no flash, no massive EMP and there was a lot of
>>>> shaking but for some reason that shaking never made it to the seismic
>>>> records. Rocky
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I still am not going to say I agree with your theory of a nuke being
>>> used on 9/11
>>> As there were many other options the perpetrators could have  used to
>>> achieve the same result.
>>>
>>> BUT I will not dismiss nukes as a possibility, at this point.
>>> As there was no chance for proper and independent testing of the
>>> debris. Which was one of the first red flags that made me realize
>>> something about 9/11 really stinks.
>>>
>>> However you may find more info about "nukes in rock" if you do a search
>>> for "operation plowshare"
>>>
>>> Unlike many of the posters here, who barely seem to be beyond the
>>> knuckle-dragging stage of evolution.
>>> And too afraid that the truth might take away their illusion and have
>>> them discover how screwed-up they themselves,  and their country,
>>> really is I am willing to consider any evidence
>>
>> Thanks for the input and I just got done posting about some of the media
>> fcukups and I forgot to mention "07 - The Key."  Oh well, maybe next
>> time but there is a good video you might want to see that got me to
>> even look into deep underground nukes as a possibility.
>>
>> 04 - Phenomena
>> https://youtu.be/a3nwzX0A2GU
>>
>> Or if you want to see the above video in the playlist it came from use:
>> https://youtu.be/a3nwzX0A2GU?list=PLEA05F393EC843D80
>>
>> Rocky
>
>
>
> The video was interesting but far too artsy to be a source of anything 
> else but hypothesis.

Very very true, but it got me to stop ignoring the video with Dimitri and 
some of the things he said in his video proved a world of knowledge beyond 
ae911truth.

I will not go into the exact part of the video with Dimitri that finally 
convinced me that we used deep underground nukes for "The Great 9/11 
Hijacker Hoax prime time movie" because your are doing fine just like you 
are.


> I agree that something caused those buildings to simply vaporize, but I 
> doubt is was anything like a conventional nuke that we have been taught 
> about.
> Of course few people even knew of the existance of thermite before 9/11.
> The military may have many more directed energy weapons we minions may 
> never know about
>
> BUT we can be certain of one thing.  it would have taken something far 
> more destructive than a group of rag tag camel jockey terrorists could 
> have ever got a hold of on their own.
>
> 9/11 WAS and inside job.

Thanks,

Rocky 

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web