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

Groups > alt.conspiracy > #266752

Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind)

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

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

>"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message 
>news:mslhv1$l2i$1@pcls7.std.com...

>>>> Liar.  They were searching the rubble for survivors almost immediately 
>>>> and
>>>> rescued people the next day.
>>
>>>That is the story that we heard on TV but I never heard about any rescues.
>>
>> Then you weren't paying attention.  11 people were rescued from the debris
>> on the first day.

>link?

Transcript of CNN Larry King broadcast, 9/12/2001.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/12/lkl.00.html

"There are two hotels in the area that have strong structural problems. 
They may go. Now, this further complicates rescue efforts here. As you 
know, Larry, about the only good news to come out of the city today is 
that rescuers were able to successfully rescue 11 folks trapped in the 
rubble. That included six firefighters, three police officers."

>>>Plus I'll bet he didn't go anywhere near the places where the three nukes
>>>were detonated.
>>
>> The whole of Manhattan would be too "hot" for anyone to enter after three
>> days after three nukes were detonated!  But since there obviously weren't
>> any nukes at all, Manhattan never was "hot".

>Link?

Lots of good stuff at:
http://www.acq.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/nm_book_5_11/appendix_F.htm
nearly all of which contradicts any sort of nuclear device being used on
9/11 (you know, such things as a 1kt nuke (tiny as nukes go) causing
third degree burns to those within 0.7 km and death in days due to 
radiation for those within 0.5 km, and induced radiation by prompt 
neutrons that makes the soil or rock dangerously radioactive for many days,
fallout, etc.
But you won't read it.  You'd rather be brainwashed into becoming one of
the sheeple by watching multiple 4 hour long Youtube videos.

>NIST and the media have been fcuking with us for a long long long time and I 
>have noticed that you still have not been able to explain why there were 
>walls that stood strong from the Twin Towers when the building was rumored 
>to have collapsed down.  Obviously the Towers didn't collapse all the way 
>down.  <G>

Simple.  First the walls were much stronger on the lower levels than on
the upper levels, since the walls on the upper levels didn't have to
support 110 floors like the lowest level did.  Second, a very tall 
unsupported structure (like an exterior wall with the floors removed)
will be very unstable, with the upper portion tending to lean over and
break off.  Once the upper portion has broken off, the remaining shorter
portion is more stable.  This process may repeat a few times.  You can
see in the videos of the collapses the outer wall panels leaning over,
breaking off and falling.  The wall sections that remained standing were 
short and stout enough not to fall. There are kids' games that demonstrate 
this process.

>Still, until someone can explain why just those parts stood better than 
>Dimitri then I have to side with Dimitri as plenty of others do too.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!  I am still laughing over his absolute stupidity!! "What
happens when it [the nuclear blast wave] hits the air?"  "Nothing!"
HAHAHAH!!!  How can he be so stupid?  And how can you be so kooktarded to
actually believe that guy?  I hope you kooktards didn't pay him for that
"expert" interview, if you did, you got totally ripped off.  On the other
hand, you know what they say about fools and their money...

"What happens when it [the nuclear blast wave] hits the air?"  "Nothing!"   
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!  I'm going to be laughing for days!!

Back to alt.conspiracy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality  "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 18:38 -0500
  Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 00:38 +0000
  Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-07 02:28 +0000
    Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 22:25 -0500
      Re: Rocky lies some more jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 05:57 +0000
      Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 00:48 +0000
        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 20:15 -0500
          Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 02:42 +0000
            Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 22:23 -0500
              Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is still cartoon blind) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 16:46 +0000
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 12:24 -0500
                Re: Rocky still deluded jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-08 18:08 +0000
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-09 06:41 +0200
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-09 17:32 +0000
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-09 17:20 -0500
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael facing: global collapse then ensued) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-10 03:07 +0000
                Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael runs from the same issue NIST ran from) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-08 12:39 -0500
            Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-08 06:41 +0200
              Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-09 06:11 +0200
        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael proved he is cartoon blind) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:57 -0500
  Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 06:11 -0500
    Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (K proves he can not recognize where debris came from) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 08:52 -0500
      Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (K proves he can not recognize where debris came from) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-07 18:11 +0000
        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael fails to address certain issues) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 15:20 -0500
          Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael fails to address certain issues) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-08 01:06 +0000
            Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (Michael fails to address certain issues again) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 20:46 -0500
        Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (2 Michael a better desc) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-07 16:59 -0500
      Re: WTC 7 NIST Cartoon vs. Reality (K proves he can not recognize where debris came from) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 17:43 -0500

csiph-web