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


Groups > alt.astronomy > #273514

Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys

From Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
References <DpidnUgB77H-Mu7JnZ2dnUU7-VOdnZ2d@giganews.com> <2uidnVX3hN6imEfInZ2dnUU7-fudnZ2d@giganews.com>
Subject Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys
Message-ID <a07468688db77a10dbf968ff5620e4c2@dizum.com> (permalink)
Date 2015-08-23 22:35 +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, in <news:2uidnVX3hN6imEfInZ2dnUU7-fudnZ2d@giganews.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> W<SMACKAKOOK!>
> 
> <SMACKAKOOK!>
> 
> And part of the reason for the "nuclear device chimney" could have been to 
> vent the radiation well above Nuke York City just like a chimney carries 
> smoke out of the area.

"vent the radiation" LOL

You have no fucking clue what you're talking about, yet you and other
broken-brained kooks like you blather on as though your delusions were
real.

What about the radiological activation of all the metal in the
buildings in the event of a nuclear detonation, Ko0k? Would the WTC
twin towers "vent" every bit of metal in NYC "just like a chimney
carries smoke out of the area"? LOL

Especially given that the twin towers *fell* *down* because they were
struck by two planes which weakened the outer truss frame, a fire
broke out which weakened the central column and melted the
viscoelastic dampers (which tied the floor spars and outer truss frame
together... the floor spars provided horizontal support to the truss
frame so it couldn't bow outward, the truss frame provided vertical
support to the perimeter of the floor spars so they couldn't droop
down... remove those inter-supporting elements from each other and all
the weight went onto the central column). The top hat truss forced the
central column to buckle because some of the floor spar / truss frame
viscoelastic dampers burned away before the others, inducing an uneven
load upon the heat-weakened central column. Once the central column
had buckled, the uneven distribution of forces successively ripped the
viscoelastic dampers apart, allowing the truss frame in successively
lower sections to bow outward as the building fell, which perpetuated
the uncontrolled collapse... this can be seen in the videos, since
chunks of the truss frame can be seen being ejected from the sides of
the building as it fell.

And the whole poorly-conceived house of cards came crashing down,
unzipping much as a zipper would, just as competent building designers
and engineers had predicted (and warned) it would as far back as 1971.

And it was all because a change in federal regulations prevented the
further use of asbestos insulation, necessitating the construction
crews to use the inferior spray-on insulation on the higher floors,
which got knocked off the central column in the collision. Had they
used conventional grid construction, rather than central column /
truss frame construction with viscoelastic dampers; had they used
asbestos or plaster / concrete fireproofing all the way to the top of
the building; had they used bolts larger than the two 5/8" bolts per
section used to hold the outer truss frame sections together; or even
done something as simple as install anchor cables between the truss
frame sections and floor spars, the buildings would have stood. But
the WTC designers negligently ignored the warnings.

There is a long list of buildings that have had the spray-on
insulation and suffered fire damage resulting in partial or complete
collapse. The McCormick Center, the Sight and Sound Theater, the Kader
Toy Factory in Singapore, the Dogwood Elementary School in Virginia,
the Windsor Tower in Madrid, the Wisma Kosgoro in Jakarta, the Alexis
Nihon Plaza Montreal, One New York Plaza (connection bolts sheared
during fire, causing several steel filler beams on the 33-34th floors
to fall and rest on the bottom flanges of their supporting girders),
and several other examples.

Oh look... here's one that got hit with a plane, and had a fire that
resulted in a partial collapse: The Bijlmermeer Apartment Complex in	
Amsterdam Zuidoost, Netherlands.

And the complete list. 22 multi-story buildings from 1970 to 2002 have
collapsed solely from fire damage weakening their structural
integrity... 6 of them being steel-framed buildings, all of those 6
being taller than 20 stories:
<http://www.jensenhughes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/White_Paper_Historical_Survey_Building_Collapse_NIST_JBeitel-NIwankiw_OCT-2006.pdf>

Photographs of structural steel deformed by fire are shown on page 3
of The Reinstatement of Fire Damaged Steel and Iron Framed Structures.
<http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/DataBase/References/Reinstatement_Fire_Damaged_Steel.pdf>

Steel loses strength when it's heated, and eventually fails, which is
why it needs protection.
<http://www.steelconstruction.info/Fire_damage_assessment_of_hot_rolled_structural_steelwork>
<http://www.steelconstruction.info/Design_using_structural_fire_standards#Effect_of_load>
<http://www.steelconstruction.info/Fire_protecting_structural_steelwork>

"All materials weaken with increasing temperature and steel is no
exception. Strength loss for steel is generally accepted to begin at
about 300°C and increases rapidly after 400°C. By 550°C steel retains
approximately 60% of its room temperature yield strength, and 45% of
its stiffness. At high temperatures, steel is also subjected to
significant thermal elongation, which may lead to adverse impacts,
especially if it is restrained. It follows therefore that one would
expect that structural steelwork which has been subjected to high
temperatures would exhibit signs of this in the form of distortion and
buckling."

"distortion and buckling" like the unprotected central columns of the
twin towers. You witless nong. LOL

And *all* of those examples were of conventional grid construction,
much *stronger* than the WTC twin towers construction, with much less
loading on their support columns.

<http://www.debunking911.com/firsttime.htm>

That's *why* the World Financial Center is designed with a concrete
core and concrete-encased outer columns. *And* why the new WTC7 and
Freedom Tower are also designed with a concrete core and
concrete-encased outer columns.

My god, you're fucking stupid.

> A<SMACKAKOOK!>

Idiotic retards spewing utterly impossible scenarios which violate the
laws of physics aren't allowed to blather out their stupidity without
first providing proof of their retarded contentions. Given that you're
delusional and thus have no proof, you'll be shutting the fuck up.

Kook. LOL

> Rocky

Now, get to addressing the 17 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... 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

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

There are now 17 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

-- 

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

WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 12:40 -0500
  Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 12:47 -0500
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 13:02 -0500
      Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 15:50 -0500
      Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-08-24 12:06 -0400
  Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 10:53 -0700
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 15:56 -0500
      caught gilber34 in bullshit (was: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 16:41 -0500
        Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit (was: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys) je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 15:02 -0700
        Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 17:07 -0500
          Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 17:22 -0500
            Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 18:20 -0500
              caught gilber34 in even more bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 20:00 -0500
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 18:07 -0700
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 20:24 -0500
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 18:36 -0700
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:04 -0500
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:11 +0100
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:16 -0500
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-25 10:06 +0100
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:02 -0500
                Re: caught gilber34 in even more bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 06:07 +0200
            Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 01:48 +0200
              Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 20:52 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 05:47 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 04:12 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@sci.physics.cunt.scabs> - 2015-08-25 10:45 +0000
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 08:11 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 06:52 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 08:00 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 19:06 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 12:54 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 04:51 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit AGAIN + My list Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 17:12 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 10:32 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 20:02 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 13:37 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"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> - 2015-08-24 15:08 -0400
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 04:40 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 23:53 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 08:52 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-08-25 08:03 +0100
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 08:58 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 17:25 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-25 10:52 -0500
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 16:47 +0000
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 20:31 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"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> - 2015-08-25 11:00 -0400
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 18:42 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"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> - 2015-08-25 13:09 -0400
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-26 03:44 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"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> - 2015-08-26 08:00 -0400
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-26 19:59 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"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> - 2015-08-26 15:39 -0400
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-27 06:42 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post "\"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> - 2015-08-27 09:58 -0400
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-27 20:09 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 19:28 +0000
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit + short post Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-25 05:29 +0200
                Re: Caught Friendly Neighborhood Nut in plenty of bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:07 -0500
        Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 23:15 +0100
          Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 18:08 -0500
            Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:11 -0500
              Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit je suis charly <charlie-gordon1492@no.where> - 2015-08-23 21:20 -0700
                Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 18:47 +0200
                Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 12:24 -0500
                Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 22:11 +0100
                Re: caught gilber34 in bullshit gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:20 -0500
  Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 22:35 +0200
    Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 17:28 -0500
      Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 01:32 +0200
      Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 23:12 -0500
        Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-24 17:28 -0500
          Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-24 23:48 +0100
            Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 23:17 +0000
          Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-24 20:21 -0500
          Re: w.t.c towers (no asbestos cladding <period "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-23 16:17 -0500
            Re: w.t.c towers (no asbestos cladding <period "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-24 09:19 -0500
  Re: WTC Constructed to be nuclear device chimneys gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-23 16:19 -0500

csiph-web