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


Groups > alt.astronomy > #273749

Re: Topaz terrorist

From Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
References (2 earlier) <58f98b41-7765-4085-81ec-4dc369f01a30@googlegroups.com> <dpkjta597l4soscmq6jr37j7dhe1h81idp@4ax.com> <YdmdnYVLaf_WYkTInZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@giganews.com> <hv0ntalubvosjg5tgk2j3ieeerosnre3co@4ax.com> <nbOdnSRyS6pyEEbInZ2dnUU7-ImdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Subject Re: Topaz terrorist
Message-ID <36a9b5a4270fcf28c485809ad360bafe@dizum.com> (permalink)
Date 2015-08-25 05:36 +0200
Newsgroups alt.astronomy, alt.conspiracy, alt.usenet.kooks, sci.physics
Organization dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Rocky (aka Michael S. Guthrie of 6913 Maynard Road, Summerfield, NC), 
in <news:nbOdnSRyS6pyEEbInZ2dnUU7-ImdnZ2d@giganews.com> did thusly 
jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> "Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:hv0ntalubvosjg5tgk2j3ieeerosnre3co@4ax.com...

>> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 12:15:27 -0500, Rocky
>> (aka Michael S. Guthrie of 6913 Maynard Road, Summerfield, NC)
>> <wookiee@att.net> wrote:

>>> Breaker.
>>> 
>>> There is one thing missing from the 9/11 Commission and that is the motive
>>> for the alleged hijackers.  So without a motive why the heck would living
>>> suicide pilots help in the Great 9/11 Hoax?

Liar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motives_for_the_September_11_attacks
"In Osama Bin Laden's November 2002 "Letter to America",[5][6] he 
explicitly stated that al-Qaeda's motives for their attacks include: 
Western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia, supporting Russian 
atrocities against Muslims in Chechnya, supporting the Indian 
oppression against Muslims in Kashmir, the Jewish aggression against 
Muslims in Lebanon, the presence of US troops in Saudi 
Arabia,[6][7][8] US support of Israel,[9][10] and sanctions against 
Iraq.[11]"

[8] "Tenth Public Hearing, Testimony of Louis Freeh". 9/11 Commission. 
April 13, 2004.

<http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf>
Starting on p.64

But then, you've never actually read the 9/11 Commission report, have 
you, Mike?

Now that you've been exposed as a liar, what will you do, Mike? LOL

Kook. LOL

>> It's clear that no real planes actually hit the towers:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQBlv7sZGVE

It is clear you're unable to deal with the reality that planes hit the 
towers, destroyed part of the outer truss frame, weakened the central 
column by fire, melted the viscoelastic dampers holding the truss 
frame and floor spars together, which allowed the floor to droop and 
buckle the weakened central column, which made successively lower 
sections of truss frame bow out and rip away from their viscoelastic 
dampers, which made successively lower floor spars transfer their load 
to the weakened central column, and the process rapidly continued as 
the building fell.

You'll note that another factor in the collapse is that the building 
designers joined all the perimeter truss frame sections on one floor 
at each of the levels where there were mechanical rooms (they were 
staggered on all the other floors). Rotating this perspective by 90 
degrees for this example, it'd be akin to building a brick wall where 
all the bricks were interlocked except for a section every so many 
feet in which the bricks were stacked straight up... it'd make for a 
much weaker wall. Thus, when the plane hit and destroyed part of the 
truss frame, the uneven stresses were transmitted and focused at those 
mechanical room levels, allowing them to break apart wholesale, thus 
allowing entire sections of truss frame above that single-floor join 
line to lose their ability to support the floor spars. Remember, the 
truss frame sections were bolted to each other with only two 5/8" 
bolts per frame section... pretty easy to break that. That Mike 
Guthrie (aka Rocky) believes one nuke was detonated under each WTC 
tower and they fell, yet WTC6 was hit by 31 nukes (your k'lame) and 
stood is proof of how delusional he is. That you believe his 
blathering sans-proof bullshit is proof of how delusional you are. LOL

IOW, it's clear you have no concept of building engineering, physics 
or reality.

IOW, it's clear you're a kook. LOL

> I still like the factt there are so many videos on the Internet that show a 
> wing disapperaring and the fact that someone proved only a CGI using 3D 
> software can do that particular stunt.

Except the video you provided, Kent Wills proved there was no "wing 
diapperaring" [sic], you're just a broken-brained kook in the throes 
of a schizophrenic paranoid-delusional break from reality. That your 
kooky conspiracy theory keeps changing means it doesn't reflect 
reality.

Kook. LOL

>>> A<SMACKAKOOK!>

>> I don't recall what NIST is. But put 9/11 Hoax in youtube and there
>> is tons of important information.

There is tons of kook blather like that "radiological decontamination" 
video Michael Scott Guthrie (aka Rocky) provided, which didn't show 
even one instance of rad decon. LOL

What there's not a lot of is intellectual discussion of actual 
building engineering and physics.

Your broken brain blathering on about your paranoid delusions doesn't 
change reality one bit. Deal with it. LOL

>> For example the buildings going down look exactly like a
>> controlled demolition.

Because you have so much experience with controlled demolitions, 
right? LOL

That uncontrolled collapse looked nothing like a controlled 
demolition, Ko0k. LOL

>> Most of this is visual so
>> usenet isn't the best place to prove it all. But those who go to
>> youtube will be amazed.

And the intelligent people will be sickened and amused at the variety 
of kooks and their blathering stupidity.

> COOL thanks because when I did that I found a video I'd been looking for for 
> a long time.  See:
> 
> 9/11 Fake: The Towers Destruction Videos
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp7SDi-lJbU

Quoting from that video:
"the entire WTC complex (7 buildings) WAS DESTROYED"

zOMG! No, that's either a lie, or delusional kook blather.

And the kook's inability to track the 5 helicopters that were in the 
air? Might be because he's stoooopid.

And his inability to calculate perspectives and angles? Might be 
because he's just as stooopid as you. And you're gullible enough to 
believe this retarded bullshit. You're compounding your stupidity with 
his. LOL

> The part I like is none of the videos show the WCBS chopper and yet the WCBS 
> chopper was the only one to record an EMP about 12 seconds before the North 
> Tower was vaporized.  Strange.  BTW I'll have to pull up the WCBS footage 
> and see if it has Pat.

If it was "the only one to record an EMP", then it wasn't an EMP... 
I've provided a link to a video from inside one of the towers, just 
prior to, during and after the collapse... no EMP.

There were likely hundreds of videos taken that day... no EMP. You 
*do* realize even small nukes cause EMP that can disrupt electronic 
devices in a wide radius, yes? Like hundreds of miles, yes? No?! LOL

What you're k'laming was "EMP" was merely satellite uplink 
interference, as has been explained to you. In fact, there were 19 
instances of satellite uplink interference on that very WCBS video, 
which led your broken brain to start k'laming there were 19 nuke 
detonations... from there your broken brain continued expanding your 
kooky conspiracy theory... to include a facility dozens of miles below 
the surface, weapons that could somehow dig themselves up from that 
facility all by themselves through miles of solid bedrock in 12 
seconds, special nukes that didn't leave behind any radioactive 
byproducts, and as many as 65 nukes. And yet you're stupid enough to 
*also* k'lame that only *one* video showed any "EMP". LOL

IOW, your brain is broken. You're having a schizophrenic 
paranoid-delusional break from reality. Take your meds, Mike.

But the seismographs from around the world didn't pick up any nuclear 
detonation signatures that day... because there weren't any. That you 
think there were is just your broken brain blathering nonsense 
unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, and contradicted by a mountain 
of strong corroborable evidence.

IOW, your brain is broken. You're having a schizophrenic 
paranoid-delusional break from reality. Take your meds, Mike.

Kook. LOL

> Rocky

Now, get to addressing the 18 ways your kook conspiracy theory 
violates the laws of physics:

======================================================
1) Your estimation of the time between detonation and the time of 
collapse puts the nukes between from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep below 
the towers, a depth we don't even have the technology to drill to 
today, let alone back in 1968. Not to mention the fact that at that 
depth, the temperature is so high things like metal *melt*. That's 
*why* we can't drill much deeper than the 7.636 miles of the Al 
Shaheen oil well in Qatar (the deepest hole *ever* dug in human 
history)... the equipment fails. That's why the Kola Superdeep 
Borehole was abandoned at 7.619 miles deep.

2) The claimed "EMP pulse" in the WCBS video *you* provided wasn't an 
EMP pulse at all, it was satellite uplink interference. If it'd been a 
nuke EMP (especially one sized 150 kt), the nanosecond time frame of 
the explosion (and thus the sharp peak of the EMP) would have caused 
the camera's electronics to burn out. No amount of shielding would 
have been sufficient to prevent that. That there is video of the 
immediate aftermath proves there was no nuke, especially one sized 
your claimed 150 kt, which would have destroyed all electronics for 
dozens of miles radius.

3) The radiation experienced was of such short duration that there's 
no way it was neutron or gamma bombardment from a nuke. If it had been 
from a nuke the metal in the buildings would have shown high levels of 
radioactivity for decades. It was found to be beta radiation from the 
tritium in the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement weapon sights 
that was the source. That you're gullible enough not to know that a 
nuke would spread radiation far and wide is testament to how 
delusional you are.

4) No nuclear detonation byproducts were found at the WTC complex or 
anywhere in NYC (MID: <e62c14c89ab831a63f27243e265c711a@dizum.com>). 
They found tritium from the aircraft exit signs and law enforcement 
weapons sites, radium from industrial sources unrelated to nuclear 
weapons and background levels for all other sources of radiation.

5) The seismic waves caused by a small 150 kt nuke wouldn't be 
sufficient to drop the buildings, it'd barely even be felt by people 
in the vicinity, especially with the bombs buried, as you k'lamed, 
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* deep. It would take on the order of 2 
MEGAtons to do so, especially at the depths you k'lame the bombs were 
buried.

6) The trigger that sets off the nuclear explosion is a neutron 
source. It naturally radioactively decays over time, and its decay 
byproducts, the elements the neutron source transmutes into as it 
decays, include xenon, which is a neutron absorber. It's called xenon 
poisoning. Any bomb that has sat for 33 years without its trigger 
being replenished will not have a trigger that is viable to start any 
sort of nuclear chain reaction.

7) I've provided a video from *inside* one of the towers *as* *it* 
*was* *collapsing*, showing the vibration from the buckling vertical 
support column and *NO* EMP:
======================
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xYjoSvzWeo>
You'll note the massive shaking from the central support column 
buckling, but *NO* EMP. And that was INSIDE the WTC tower. No amount 
of shielding would have saved that camera from a nuke EMP.
======================

8) Why aren't you explaining how those supposed nukes were going to 
survive at a depth of 37.28 miles (where the temperature would be 
approximately 960 degrees F) to 96.93 miles (where the temperature 
would be approximately 1840 degrees F), Ko0K?

9) Explain how a nuclear weapon can direct its explosion through a 
hole without any of the compressive blast going out into surrounding 
rock.

10) Explain how 19 nukes (according to you, another leap of logic 
taken by your broken brain to explain away the 19 instances of 
satellite uplink interference in the video *you* provided) were 
detonated at the WTC complex in rapid succession, yet no ill effects 
were experienced by electronics, the electrical grid or aircraft.

11) Why aren't you explaining how the personnel you claim were sent 
down to service those nukes (because now that you know the 
neutron-source triggers for nuclear weapons require replacement on a 
periodic basis, your broken brain *had* to construct an entire 
facility at 37.28 to 96.93 miles deep (far deeper than we have the 
technology to dig even today, let alone back in 1968), complete with 
"4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back into the area 
the nukes were maintained", or your brain would have been forced to 
admit it was wrong when it told you those nukes sat untouched for 33 
years and maintained their viability) are supposed to survive in 960 
to 1840 degree heat?

12) You admitted (MID:<ed75e9d6f7ccf7296c075fd695673a37@dizum.com>) 
that all the materials used in construction of the twin towers (all 
1.5 million tons of it) had been accounted for and trucked off to the 
Fresh Kills landfill. How will you reconcile your admission with your 
kook blather that significant percentages of the buildings "vaporized" 
(your word) and "floated toward Europe" (your words)?

13) Why can't you provide proof of the nuclear explosion seismic 
signatures for these 19 nukes you k'lame were detonated at the WTC 
site on 11 Sep 2001?

14) Where were the vertically-directed plumes of dust and debris 
kicked up from your claimed nuclear weapons being detonated deep 
underground, Ko0K?

15) Explain how the 19 nukes you claimed to have existed could have 
tunneled holes from the underground installation 37.28 to 96.93 miles 
deep that you claimed to have existed, to directly under the WTC 
complex... in 12 seconds... through solid bedrock... prior to 
detonating directly below the WTC towers (which, of course, fucks up 
your timing between the detonations you claim took place (for which 
you used the WCBS video, claiming the satellite uplink interference 
was "EMP") and the collapses, leading you back to where your delusion 
started. Congratulations, Dimwit, you've made the full circuit on The 
Island of Insanity. Now go 'round again.).

16) Explain why you're now saying there were 34 nukes 
(MID:<345fee8b286a91037bc806ed589d182d@dizum.com>), as opposed to your 
previously k'lamed 19 nukes (and your previously, previously k'lamed 3 
nukes)... would it be because your broken little brain is squirming 
under the scorching twin beams of truth and reality, screaming in 
agony at its being forced to see just how delusional it truly is? 
While you're at it, get to explaining how the regular rad sweeps 
(radiological surveys) at the twin towers (because the space was 
primarily rented by government agencies) showed no nukes or any 
contamination whatsoever, and how 34 nukes were obtained and put in 
place without drawing any attention whatsoever. Of course, this 
*still* fucks up your timing between the detonations (ie: your claimed 
"EMP" on the WCBS video) and the collapses, leading you back to where 
your delusion started... that unresolvable logic hole rears its ugly 
head again. LOL

17) Your broken brain is yet again expanding your delusion with your 
"34 or more nukes" blather (you're now saying there were 65 nukes 
(MID: <984122ddbf1e4e5d6f5a7b3f56eeeb6f@dizum.com>))... eventually, 
your broken brain will be telling you that NYC today is a CGI and the 
real city was blown up by 
1,592,629,490,173,371,449,138,916,004,581,949 intelligent nano-nukes 
which autonomously dug their way up from their secret underground 
MoleMan base 15,682,941 miles below the surface of our hollow planet 
and attached themselves to every steel part of every building in NYC 
and vaporized them and they all floated down to MoleVille, and the 
fact that the EMP from all those nukes detonating at once didn't burn 
out every electrical generating station, electrical substation, every 
piece of electronic equipment, every vehicle, every aircraft... that's 
*proof* that NYC is a CGI today! LOL

18) Explain how a nuclear weapon wouldn't have nuclear detonation 
byproducts with the right nuclear trigger, according to your words 
"with the right detonator you could have a 'clean' nuke" ().

Do you see how utterly ridiculous you're beginning to sound? Get back 
on your meds, you delusional loon.
======================================================

There are now 18 ways your kook konspiracy theory violates the laws of 
physics... now you'd better get to work addressing each one, point by 
point, or people are gonna know you're just a retard who can't grasp 
simple physics.

Kook. LOL

-- 

------------------------------------
Michael Scott Guthrie (aka Rocky)
336-643-6611
6913 Maynard Road
Summerfield, NC 27358-9206

Now that everyone knows who you are, they can get you the psychiatric 
help you so desperately need. Perhaps they could call your mother 
Paula S. Guthrie, given that you're in your 30's and you still live at 
home with mommy... and Grandma Martha. LOL

Your brother Scott certainly won't be happy to know you're 
embarrassing the Guthrie family name, how's he gonna find real estate 
clients if everyone knows the Guthries are a pack of schizo kooks? LOL

Just how many backwoods redneck hillbillies can fit in one small 1200 
sf 3bd/1.5 ba house?! Does RockyRetard share a bedroom with his 
brother? Or do they make Grandma Martha sleep on the porch? LOL
------------------------------------

Michael Guthrie (aka Rocky), your brain is grasping at straws in 
trying to avoid admitting *you* *are* *wrong*, and as your brain 
becomes more and more desperate to avoid the truth we promulgate 
(which utterly demolishes your kook conspiracy theory), it makes 
larger and larger leaps of illogic.

For instance:
=============================
A) You said the satellite uplink inteference seen in the WCBS video 
*you* *provided* was a nuke EMP, so your broken brain told you they 
must have buried nukes under the twin towers. Being a simpleton, you 
believed they just dug shallow holes, dropped the nukes in, smoothed 
over the concrete and walked away for 33 years.

B) Your timing on the WCBS video *you* *provided* between the 
satellite uplink interference (what you deemed to be a "nuke EMP") and 
the tower falling being 12 seconds (it was actually 14 seconds, but 
kooks can't count) means your supposed nukes had to have been buried 
from 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* below the surface (dependent upon soil 
composition and thus speed of compressive blast transmission). Never 
mind that we don't have the technology to drill that deep even today, 
let alone in 1968. Your broken brain had to yet again change your 
kooky little conspiracy theory to at least try to orient itself at 
some acute angle to reality. So no "dug a shallow hole, dropped the 
nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years" anymore, now it was 
"dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, 
walked away for 33 years".

C) You're such a simpleton you didn't realize nukes require periodic 
replacement of their neutron-source trigger, which naturally 
radioactively decays over time, building up the decay byproduct xenon, 
which absorbs neutrons. It's called xenon poisoning. So your broken 
brain told you that someone had to service those nukes to keep the 
triggers viable... which means your broken brain was thus *forced* to 
change from "dug a shallow hole, dropped the nukes in, covered it up, 
walked away for 33 years", to "dug an impossibly deep hole, dropped 
the nukes in, covered it up, walked away for 33 years", to "built an 
entire *facility* impossibly deep under the WTC, complete with service 
personnel and" "4 blast doors to keep the explosion from getting back 
into the area the nukes were maintained" (your words).

D) Your broken brain then said there were 19 nukes instead of your 
original 3, because you knew there were 19 instances of satellite 
uplink interference in the WCBS video *you* *provided*, in which you 
k'lamed one of the instances of satellite uplink interference was an 
EMP. And if you k'lame one of them is an EMP, they *all* must be EMPs, 
so your broken brain now tells you there were 19 nukes detonated in 
rapid succession... completely ignoring the fact that even one nuke 
detonation would plunge the city into darkness due to EMP burning out 
electrical substations, and completely ignoring the fact that no 
nuclear detonation byproducts were found in the rubble, in the 
vicinity of the rubble, or anywhere in NYC.

E) Now that your broken brain was convinced that the nukes were buried 
deeply, of course, they had a very wide blast radius, which screwed up 
your kooky k'lame that they were used to demolish WTC1 and WTC2, but 
somehow missed WTC3 and WTC4... so your broken brain conceived that 
the nuclear weapons could somehow dig themselves up from that 
miles-deep facility to just below the WTC towers prior to exploding, 
in order to make their cone of destruction smaller. Nevermind that 
your broken brain said they dug through 37.28 to 96.93 *miles* of 
*solid* *bedrock* in *12* *seconds*. LOL

F) So I've led you by the nose in a full circle... if those bombs your 
broken brain is telling you existed *did* dig their way up to 
underneath the WTC twin towers before detonating (they didn't... first 
because there were no nukes, second because it'd be impossible, but 
for the sake of argument, we'll continue), that leads right back to 
your calculation of the time between your claimed "EMP" (the satellite 
uplink interference on the WCBS video *you* *provided*) and the time 
the buildings fell, which is pretty much where we started. So I've 
proven by drop-kicking your retarded ass around the perimeter of 
sanity full-circle that you're insane. LOL

G) Realizing the utter ridiculousness of your kook blather above, your 
broken brain has backpedaled and expanded your delusion even more as a 
desperate attempt at attaining some semblance of plausibility... 
saying there were 34 mini-nukes, and they were within and underneath 
the twin towers. If those 34 nukes you claim existed *did* explode, 
where are the nuclear detonation byproducts? The highly radioactive 
metal? The radiation burns and radiation sickness of people in the 
vicinity? Where are the nuclear detonation signature seismographs? Why 
did the electrical grid, all electronics and all vehicles survive not 
just one but *34* nuclear EMPs? And what about that timing between the 
WCBS video satellite uplink interference (what you claimed was "EMP") 
and the shaking and collapse of the tower? That's now off by 14 whole 
seconds, just as it was when your kooky conspiracy theory began. LOL

H) Your brain becoming more and more broken, in just one short day it 
moved from G) above to now telling you there are *more* than 34 nukes. 
Where does your broken brain stop, Ko0k? Billions of intelligent 
nano-nukes covering every metal surface of the twin towers? Robot 
"crisis actors" able to withstand the extreme radiation? All of NYC 
being blow up, replaced by a CGI that we all are fooled by today? LOL

IOW, your broken brain is far too stupid to discern fantasy from 
reality, so you've caught yourself in an unresolvable logic hole. And 
the harder you try to resolve it, the more you run around in little 
tard-circles, banging your head with your fist and doing your very 
best Rainman impersonation. I can twist your brain into a Gordian Knot 
with my knowledge. And I've just barely even started, I haven't even 
worked up a sweat yet.
=============================

Kook. LOL

Back to alt.astronomy | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 12:15 -0500
  Re: Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-24 15:58 -0500
    Re: Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 16:33 -0500
      Re: Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 17:07 -0500
      Re: Topaz terrorist Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 23:48 +0100
        Re: Topaz terrorist je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-24 16:11 -0700
        Re: Topaz terrorist BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-25 14:17 -0400
          Re: Topaz terrorist BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-25 14:39 -0400
      Re: Topaz terrorist Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 05:36 +0200
        Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-27 10:21 -0500
          Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-27 17:02 +0000
            Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's & Jim's BS, BS and BS) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-27 15:48 -0500
              Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's & Jim's BS, BS and BS) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-27 21:15 +0000
          Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-28 06:05 +0200
            Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-28 09:05 -0500
              Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-28 18:27 +0200
              Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-28 17:50 +0000
              Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-29 17:18 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-30 05:05 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-08-30 03:19 -0700
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Thanks Topaz) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 11:54 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-30 19:14 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 12:40 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-31 00:44 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 19:37 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-31 16:32 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-01 05:05 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-01 16:38 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-02 06:37 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-02 16:27 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-02 18:50 -0400
                Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-03 06:00 +0200
                Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-03 16:36 -0500
                Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-04 08:00 +0200
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:29 -0500
                Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-05 07:19 +0200
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-05 06:05 -0500
                Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-05 19:53 +0200
                Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-05 21:53 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-01 16:51 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-02 15:36 -0500
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Why GZ was called GZ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-03 16:57 -0500
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Why GZ was called GZ) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 15:48 -0700
                Re: Rocky still jobless and crazy as a loon jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-03 22:42 +0000
                Re: Re: Rocky still jobless and crazy as a loon Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:23 -0500
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Why GZ was called GZ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-04 16:42 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Why GZ was called GZ) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-05 05:59 -0500
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Why GZ was called GZ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-04 16:22 -0500
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-30 06:40 -0500
                Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-04 08:36 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:26 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-05 07:19 +0200
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (Friendly Neiborhood Nut's BS, BS and BS) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-05 06:03 -0500
              Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-31 16:54 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-01 16:43 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-01 16:56 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 15:26 -0700
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-01 17:28 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 15:39 -0700
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-02 09:52 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 13:07 -0700
                Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-02 15:56 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-02 16:34 -0500
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist  (quick list) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-02 16:53 -0500
      Re: Re: Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 16:57 -0500
        Re: Re: Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 17:33 -0500
          Re: Re: Re: Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-26 04:01 -0500
          Re: Topaz terrorist gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-27 13:14 -0500
      Re: Re: Topaz terrorist (was: Re: Re: Nuke Em ( asking % for a % )) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 20:18 -0500

csiph-web