Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #521637 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-17 10:03 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 175 — 11 participants |
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.
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 10:03 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 11:19 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 09:47 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 16:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-17 12:11 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 09:04 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:31 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 12:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:04 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:15 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 10:07 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 09:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:22 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 07:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 15:57 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 15:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 23:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:21 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 14:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 19:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:21 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 20:38 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 03:27 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:38 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:40 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:15 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-17 17:57 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 13:28 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:09 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:25 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kid Wills is a BIG LIAR ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-17 19:45 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 15:30 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 19:36 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 20:35 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 09:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:28 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 17:48 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 22:28 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 16:53 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-17 17:34 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 21:48 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 09:57 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-17 20:17 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:29 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:13 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:36 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-19 13:20 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 10:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:19 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:38 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 12:52 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 12:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-19 18:53 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:17 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:53 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 23:35 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 05:32 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 12:29 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 17:07 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 18:39 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:50 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 23:14 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 23:44 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 20:33 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 22:57 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:34 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:52 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:20 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:19 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 21:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 03:59 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in more lies ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 08:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-22 15:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-23 00:58 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:37 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in even more lies ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 03:37 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:48 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 10:01 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-21 10:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 09:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-22 05:07 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-22 17:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 23:27 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-20 07:56 +0200
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 01:56 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 15:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 09:52 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:05 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-19 20:32 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 20:31 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:54 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 09:52 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-20 15:21 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:22 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-21 13:01 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 13:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 17:55 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:23 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 07:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:31 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 13:59 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 05:07 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 07:57 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 07:22 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:20 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:19 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 03:01 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:48 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:24 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 13:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-18 18:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:18 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 13:03 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-20 10:01 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:40 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-17 17:32 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-17 22:54 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 06:39 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-18 19:14 +0100
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 21:08 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-18 10:01 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-19 09:29 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 14:05 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 09:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-18 16:34 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 17:44 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 14:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-19 00:34 +0000
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-19 11:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:18 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 14:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 22:09 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 13:03 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 12:17 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 14:41 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 18:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 18:53 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 22:44 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-20 23:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-21 02:30 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-21 02:58 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 06:34 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:17 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-22 14:17 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 17:59 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 12:22 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 11:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( the Ediot forgets a link I gave him earlier ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-20 18:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-19 01:16 -0400
Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 03:39 -0500
Page 4 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 23:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtl9h7$qhn$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522138 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. > > No they don't, raving kook. > >> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >> vaporization range of a nuke. > > A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor > it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize > the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. > >> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters >> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? > > What test results would those be, raving kook? Uh,...THIS False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc When Kevin Ryan started blowing the whisle on NIST and the 9/11 report,....he had his ass fired But I suppose we know it really never happened in your world, as your 9/11 fairytale bible is from a different dimensional reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 05:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <tvs1dc-fll.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #522148 |
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >> >> No they don't, raving kook. >> >>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>> vaporization range of a nuke. >> >> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. >> >>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters >>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? >> >> What test results would those be, raving kook? > > > > Uh,...THIS > False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc Oh; yet another kook video on youtube. Yawn. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 12:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtmmpb$s7v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522206 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >> >> >> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>> >>> No they don't, raving kook. >>> >>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>> >>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. >>> >>>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters >>>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? >>> >>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >> >> >> >> Uh,...THIS >> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc > > Oh; yet another kook video on youtube. > > Yawn. Well if you didn't want to see the Underwiters Labs Steel test results, why did you just ask about them ??? ....And they say WOMEN are illogical ?,.....they obviously never met a 9/11 official fairytaler.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 17:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <6o53dc-p4q.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #522223 |
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>>> >>>> No they don't, raving kook. >>>> >>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>>> >>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. >>>> >>>>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters >>>>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? >>>> >>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >>> >>> >>> >>> Uh,...THIS >>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc >> >> Oh; yet another kook video on youtube. >> >> Yawn. > > > Well if you didn't want to see the Underwiters Labs Steel test results, why > did you just ask about them ??? I did not ask that, delusional lunatic. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtncci$q1i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522234 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >> >> >> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>>>> >>>>> No they don't, raving kook. >>>>> >>>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>>>> >>>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Uh,...THIS >>>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc >>> >>> Oh; yet another kook video on youtube. >>> >>> Yawn. >> >> >> Well if you didn't want to see the Underwiters Labs Steel test >> results, why did you just ask about them ??? > > I did not ask that, delusional lunatic. That's strange,....as about 17 lines up you wrote..... ">>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? " After Rocky specifically mentioned UL testing. As I'm sure anyone who checks back in the thread a few posts can verify easily enough With blackouts like that, I think you should have your doctors, up the medication, and probably check for a brain tumor. But until you can post a full doctors report, as to your competancy. I'm going to have to quit replying to you as I don't like to knowingly take adavantage of handicapped people. ...And I will pray for you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 17:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <QYydnX5eHqX9pWLInZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522340 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:mtncci$q1i$1@dont-email.me... > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>>>>> >>>>>> No they don't, raving kook. >>>>>> >>>>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>>>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>>>>> >>>>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>>>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>>>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. > > And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters > Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? > >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Uh,...THIS >>>>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc >>>> >>>> Oh; yet another kook video on youtube. >>>> >>>> Yawn. >>> >>> >>> Well if you didn't want to see the Underwiters Labs Steel test >>> results, why did you just ask about them ??? >> >> I did not ask that, delusional lunatic. > > > > > > > > That's strange,....as about 17 lines up you wrote..... > ">>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? " > > After Rocky specifically mentioned UL testing. > As I'm sure anyone who checks back in the thread a few posts can verify > easily enough > > With blackouts like that, I think you should have your doctors, up the > medication, and probably check for a brain tumor. > But until you can post a full doctors report, as to your competancy. > I'm going to have to quit replying to you as I don't like to knowingly > take adavantage of handicapped people. > ...And I will pray for you. LOL I never thought jimp was handicapped but he could be. All I noticed was if was so easy for jimp to lie about one thing it would be easy for him to lie about everything so I gave up on him a while back. Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 23:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7r3dc-tas.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #522349 |
In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > I never thought jimp was handicapped but he could be. All I noticed was if > was so easy for jimp to lie about one thing it would be easy for him to lie > about everything so I gave up on him a while back. Translation: I kept presenting facts Rocky could not accept and asking him questions he could not answer. The only possible response from Rocky's pathetic delusional mind was to declare everything a lie. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <evfuvadmapdian45bleh11ubl2d8u180t3@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522362 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 23:14:36 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>> I never thought jimp was handicapped but he could be. All I noticed was if
>> was so easy for jimp to lie about one thing it would be easy for him to lie
>> about everything so I gave up on him a while back.
>
>Translation: I kept presenting facts Rocky could not accept and asking
>him questions he could not answer.
>
>The only possible response from Rocky's pathetic delusional mind was
>to declare everything a lie.
Sadly, that is how he most often deals with the truth. He
declares it a lie and refuses to address it further.
Don't worry though. If his ignoring you is anything like his
ignoring of me, he'll be replying to your posts soon enough.
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 23:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <uvs3dc-jgs.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #522371 |
In sci.physics "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 23:14:36 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >> >>> I never thought jimp was handicapped but he could be. All I noticed was if >>> was so easy for jimp to lie about one thing it would be easy for him to lie >>> about everything so I gave up on him a while back. >> >>Translation: I kept presenting facts Rocky could not accept and asking >>him questions he could not answer. >> >>The only possible response from Rocky's pathetic delusional mind was >>to declare everything a lie. > > Sadly, that is how he most often deals with the truth. He > declares it a lie and refuses to address it further. > Don't worry though. If his ignoring you is anything like his > ignoring of me, he'll be replying to your posts soon enough. Oh, I really don't care if he replies or not; if he doesn't that is just that much less insane, raving babble to read and refute. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 20:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <23kuvadr0uup5je3sb56s6li6utc0v1esn@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522362 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 23:14:36 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >> I never thought jimp was handicapped but he could be. All I noticed was if >> was so easy for jimp to lie about one thing it would be easy for him to lie >> about everything so I gave up on him a while back. > >Translation: I kept presenting facts Rocky could not accept and asking >him questions he could not answer. > >The only possible response from Rocky's pathetic delusional mind was >to declare everything a lie. And everyone a stalker.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 22:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m8q3dc-66s.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #522340 |
In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>>>>> >>>>>> No they don't, raving kook. >>>>>> >>>>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>>>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>>>>> >>>>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>>>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>>>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. > > And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters > Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? Nope; no such thing happened. > >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Uh,...THIS >>>>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc >>>> >>>> Oh; yet another kook video on youtube. >>>> >>>> Yawn. >>> >>> >>> Well if you didn't want to see the Underwiters Labs Steel test >>> results, why did you just ask about them ??? >> >> I did not ask that, delusional lunatic. > > > That's strange,....as about 17 lines up you wrote..... > ">>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? " Yes, that is correct, but I did not say I "want to see the Underwiters Labs Steel test results" as there is no such thing, raving kook. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 10:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3069df6450910d6798c2cc@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522356 |
In article <m8q3dc-66s.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > > In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers > >>>>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> No they don't, raving kook. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the > >>>>>>> vaporization range of a nuke. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor > >>>>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize > >>>>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. > > > > And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters > > Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? > > Nope; no such thing happened. > > > > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>> > >>>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Uh,...THIS > >>>>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) > >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc > >>>> > >>>> Oh; yet another kook video on youtube. > >>>> > >>>> Yawn. > >>> > >>> > >>> Well if you didn't want to see the Underwiters Labs Steel test > >>> results, why did you just ask about them ??? > >> > >> I did not ask that, delusional lunatic. > > > > > > That's strange,....as about 17 lines up you wrote..... > > ">>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? " > > Yes, that is correct, but I did not say I "want to see the Underwiters > Labs Steel test results" as there is no such thing, raving kook. A minor detail to a Troofer. They just keep recycling the same old tired bullshit claims that were disproven long ago. I guess they forgot about that and pulled it out of the wastebasket of BS claims, again. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 09:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <q-idnf8dwK9NhJ3LnZ2dnUU7-bGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522471 |
"BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message news:MPG.3069df6450910d6798c2cc@news.giganews.com... > > A minor detail to a Troofer. They just keep recycling the same old tired > bullshit claims that were disproven long ago. I guess they forgot about > that and pulled it out of the wastebasket of BS claims, again. Since when can you call videos put together July 30, 2015 "old tired bullshit?" See: NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W And look at your complete lack of arguments! All you ever do is use ad hominem remarks just like you did above. < G> You with your 9/11 Hoaxsters are losing the battle because more and more people are seeing The Great 9/11 Hijacker Hoax" for the staged event that it was. 9/11 Exposed - 2nd Edition (2015) Full Documentary Film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXRDq9nKJ0U Rocky
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <04p00b5qu97fok4aq3nq499jrkfgipgmfq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522477 |
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 09:52:10 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>
>"BDK" <Control@Worldcontrol.com> wrote in message
>news:MPG.3069df6450910d6798c2cc@news.giganews.com...
>>
>> A minor detail to a Troofer. They just keep recycling the same old tired
>> bullshit claims that were disproven long ago. I guess they forgot about
>> that and pulled it out of the wastebasket of BS claims, again.
>
>Since when can you call videos put together July 30, 2015 "old tired
>bullshit?" See:
>
When they present the same disproved claims, it is old tired bull
shit.
>NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
>
>And look at your complete lack of arguments! All you ever do is use ad
>hominem remarks just like you did above. < G>
>
Says the 'tard you calls me Kid.
>You with your 9/11 Hoaxsters are losing the battle because more and more
>people are seeing The Great 9/11 Hijacker Hoax" for the staged event that it
>was.
Where is your link for this claim?
>
>9/11 Exposed - 2nd Edition (2015) Full Documentary Film
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXRDq9nKJ0U
>
Bull shit is bull shit, no matter how many times you post it.
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tofuvalekvlkqkb9h5afol3aqqqnm3qnn4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522148 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 23:35:20 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers
>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition.
>>
>> No they don't, raving kook.
>>
>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the
>>> vaporization range of a nuke.
>>
>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor
>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize
>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook.
>>
>>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters
>>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too?
>>
>> What test results would those be, raving kook?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Uh,...THIS
>False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL)
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc
>
>When Kevin Ryan started blowing the whisle on NIST and the 9/11
>report,....he had his ass fired
>But I suppose we know it really never happened in your world, as your 9/11
>fairytale bible is from a different dimensional reality.
Kevin Ryan was fired for misrepresenting himself as a spokesman
for UL and for lying in his statements.
Do you have anything credible to offer?
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 21:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtnlnt$jfq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522365 |
K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: > On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 23:35:20 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>> >>> No they don't, raving kook. >>> >>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>> >>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. >>> >>>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters >>>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? >>> >>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Uh,...THIS >> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc >> >> When Kevin Ryan started blowing the whistle on NIST and the 9/11 >> report,....he had his ass fired >> But I suppose we know it really never happened in your world, as your >> 9/11 fairytale bible is from a different dimensional reality. > > Kevin Ryan was fired for misrepresenting himself as a spokesman > for UL and for lying in his statements. > Do you have anything credible to offer? Well, lets see,...As he WAS the representative for Underwriters Labs,.....he actually was giving testimony as their representative. But when he said the truth, and had the documentation, and wouldn't go along with the official fairytale, and stepped on the wrong toes,.....he suddenly got fired. He was lucky,....most people who publicly went against the official 9/11 fairytale,...JUST VANISHED COMPLETELY.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 21:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IfednS59Y_Yz7GLInZ2dnUU7-QWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522405 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in message news:mtnlnt$jfq$1@dont-email.me... > > > K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 23:35:20 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>>> >>>> No they don't, raving kook. >>>> >>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>>> >>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. >>>> >>>>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters >>>>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? >>>> >>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Uh,...THIS >>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc >>> >>> When Kevin Ryan started blowing the whistle on NIST and the 9/11 >>> report,....he had his ass fired >>> But I suppose we know it really never happened in your world, as your >>> 9/11 fairytale bible is from a different dimensional reality. >> >> Kevin Ryan was fired for misrepresenting himself as a spokesman >> for UL and for lying in his statements. >> Do you have anything credible to offer? Well, lets see,...As he WAS the representative for Underwriters Labs,.....he actually was giving testimony as their representative. But when he said the truth, and had the documentation, and wouldn't go along with the official fairytale, and stepped on the wrong toes,.....he suddenly got fired. He was lucky,....most people who publicly went against the official 9/11 fairytale,...JUST VANISHED COMPLETELY. =================== Mysterious Deaths of 9 11 Witnesses MUST SEE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOR01wDn_pI
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 03:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mmhvval8srqn2vfili6rk2hpetuo7c9r0q@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522405 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 21:19:33 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 23:35:20 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers
>>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition.
>>>>
>>>> No they don't, raving kook.
>>>>
>>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the
>>>>> vaporization range of a nuke.
>>>>
>>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor
>>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize
>>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook.
>>>>
>>>>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters
>>>>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too?
>>>>
>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Uh,...THIS
>>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL)
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc
>>>
>>> When Kevin Ryan started blowing the whistle on NIST and the 9/11
>>> report,....he had his ass fired
>>> But I suppose we know it really never happened in your world, as your
>>> 9/11 fairytale bible is from a different dimensional reality.
>>
>> Kevin Ryan was fired for misrepresenting himself as a spokesman
>> for UL and for lying in his statements.
>> Do you have anything credible to offer?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Well, lets see,...As he WAS the representative for Underwriters Labs,.....he
>actually was giving testimony as their representative.
Since he was never the representative for Underwriter's Labs, no
he wasn't.
>But when he said the truth,
He lied.,
>and had the documentation,
He had none. He was lying.
>and wouldn't go along
>with the official fairytale, and stepped on the wrong toes,.....he suddenly
>got fired.
He was fired for the reasons I cite above.
The reasons are not a secret.
>
>He was lucky,....most people who publicly went against the official 9/11
>fairytale,...JUST VANISHED COMPLETELY.
>
When, like exactly, did you lose all contact with reality?
--
Shill #3. Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-21 08:53 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in more lies ) |
| Message-ID | <To6dnZ_t9Na-kZ3LnZ2dnUU7-SudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522450 |
"K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message news:mmhvval8srqn2vfili6rk2hpetuo7c9r0q@4ax.com... > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 21:19:33 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > >>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 23:35:20 -0400, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Too bad you have yet to explain why the remains of the Twin Towers >>>>>> look like the remains of a Nuclear Controlled Demolition. >>>>> >>>>> No they don't, raving kook. >>>>> >>>>>> With walls still standing strong and people living below the >>>>>> vaporization range of a nuke. >>>>> >>>>> A nuclear device explodes from where the device is outward, therefor >>>>> it is impossible for a nuclear device under a building to vaporize >>>>> the top part but not the bottom part, raving kook. >>>>> >>>>>> And do not forget, NIST lied about the test results at Underwriters >>>>>> Laboratory so why not have others falsify other data too? >>>>> >>>>> What test results would those be, raving kook? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Uh,...THIS >>>> False Flag 17.3f :2001 9/11 WTC-Ryan (UL) >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onH4sAjFjgc >>>> >>>> When Kevin Ryan started blowing the whistle on NIST and the 9/11 >>>> report,....he had his ass fired >>>> But I suppose we know it really never happened in your world, as your >>>> 9/11 fairytale bible is from a different dimensional reality. >>> >>> Kevin Ryan was fired for misrepresenting himself as a spokesman >>> for UL and for lying in his statements. >>> Do you have anything credible to offer? >> >> >> >>Well, lets see,...As he WAS the representative for Underwriters >>Labs,.....he >>actually was giving testimony as their representative. > > Since he was never the representative for Underwriter's Labs, no > he wasn't. > >>But when he said the truth, > > He lied., > >>and had the documentation, > > He had none. He was lying. > >>and wouldn't go along >>with the official fairytale, and stepped on the wrong toes,.....he >>suddenly >>got fired. > > He was fired for the reasons I cite above. > The reasons are not a secret. > >> >>He was lucky,....most people who publicly went against the official 9/11 >>fairytale,...JUST VANISHED COMPLETELY. >> > > When, like exactly, did you lose all contact with reality? Kidd, I have asked you this before if you think there is something wrong with the following videos then state what they are along with your supporting evidence or STFU. NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 04:53 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: 9/11 Fake: As Seen On TV! ( Kidd caught in more lies ) |
| Message-ID | <kev00bt9rh7nit34sj5vd7an2gomsu5p3p@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #522465 |
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 08:53:49 -0500, "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
[...]
>>>> Kevin Ryan was fired for misrepresenting himself as a spokesman
>>>> for UL and for lying in his statements.
>>>> Do you have anything credible to offer?
>>>
>>>
>>>Well, lets see,...As he WAS the representative for Underwriters
>>>Labs,.....he actually was giving testimony as their representative.
>>
>> Since he was never the representative for Underwriter's Labs, no
>> he wasn't.
>>
>>>But when he said the truth,
>>
>> He lied.,
>>
>>>and had the documentation,
>>
>> He had none. He was lying.
>>
>>>and wouldn't go along
>>>with the official fairytale, and stepped on the wrong toes,.....he
>>>suddenly got fired.
>>
>> He was fired for the reasons I cite above.
>> The reasons are not a secret.
>>
>>>He was lucky,....most people who publicly went against the official 9/11
>>>fairytale,...JUST VANISHED COMPLETELY.
>>
>> When, like exactly, did you lose all contact with reality?
>
>Kidd, I have asked you this before if you think there is something wrong
>with the following videos then state what they are along with your
>supporting evidence or STFU.
>
You only began posting the play list on 9/21/15. The post to
which I am replying is the first time you've mentioned the play list
to me.
But you will post the MIDs, in the PROPER FORMAT, for the times
when you've already asked. Unless I just caught you in another lie.
>NIST's Questionable Collapse Initiation Sequence
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm5UJ3igmxaIBJw8yvK1-a9H_11kBDS8W
>
I don't see the connection to Kevin Ryan's falsely claiming to
represent UL or his lying about the findings of UL.
"Reason and evidence can't change ones opinion on a topic if their
belief wasn't based on reason and evidence to start with."
Roger "Rocky" Wittekind explaining why he still claims nukes were used
on 9/11/01 in
Message-ID: <IoGdnbEGb_w08mvInZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web