Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.astronomy > #272185
| From | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.astronomy, alt.conspiracy, sci.physics |
| Subject | 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake |
| Date | 2015-08-10 15:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <qPWdneJLQInSklTInZ2dnUU7-NmdnZ2d@giganews.com> (permalink) |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEk81AL5qg0 And my top reason that the story of the alleged hijackers was bogus was the crash dynamics. All four jets were not consistent with real crashes because of missing debris as in the case of Flights 77 and 93 or the lack of a slow down on impact with Flights 11 or 175 which means Crisis Actors were needed to get you to believe that the CGIs that rammed into the Twin Towers were real. BTW if you look close at the crash dynamics of the jets going into the Twin Towers you will see a small flash on impact. That flash was only used to synchronize the real world with the bogus world so now you know the real reason for that flash. <G> FYI for those that do not know about nukes they have a "Vaporization Range" which on modern nukes is adjustable. So all the 9/11 perpetraitors had to do was make some adjustments to vaporize the Twin Towers right to the bogus impacts so they appeared to be crushed by the top part of the towers. But if the Twin Towers were crushed why did so much survive that was out of easy range for the deep underground nukes that were under WTC3 and WTC4? https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/tag/ground-zero/ And I've looked at the link above. While it contains a lot of good information it fails to address that the "Surviving Corners" of the Twin Towers can be used to figure out where the deep underground nukes were detonated. Rocky
Back to alt.astronomy | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-10 15:54 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 16:12 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-10 16:34 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-10 21:59 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-10 17:24 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-10 22:41 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 09:09 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-11 14:07 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 15:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 20:36 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 16:02 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 22:28 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 17:35 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 23:29 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-12 05:27 -0400
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-12 16:58 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-12 15:49 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-12 21:09 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-12 19:02 -0400
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-15 11:03 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-08-12 18:56 -0400
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 16:29 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-10 16:40 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-11 04:30 -0500
Caught K the Kook in a farce (was: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-10 16:51 -0500
Re: Caught K the Kook in a farce (was: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-11 04:30 -0500
Re: Caught K the Kook in a farce (was: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 09:31 -0500
Re: Caught K the Kook in a farce (was: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-11 14:52 -0500
Re: Caught K the Kook in aBIG FARCE (was: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 15:46 -0500
Re: Caught K the Kook in aBIG FARCE (was: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 04:23 -0500
Re: Caught K the Kook in aBIG FARCE (was: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-12 16:24 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-10 21:21 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-10 16:42 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-10 22:02 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-10 17:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-10 22:56 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 09:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 18:50 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 15:00 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 20:37 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 16:04 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 22:30 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 17:39 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 23:31 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 04:21 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-14 16:47 +0100
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-16 09:25 +0100
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 04:21 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 04:20 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-12 17:11 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-08-13 04:36 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-11 14:10 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-12 09:19 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-08-10 23:27 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 09:15 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 18:54 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake (#1 the planes were CGIs) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 15:25 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake (#1 the planes were CGIs) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 20:42 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake (#1 the planes were CGIs) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 16:15 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake (#1 the planes were CGIs) jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-11 22:33 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-11 09:41 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-08-11 15:28 +0000
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-12 09:06 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-12 16:13 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-18 06:45 +0200
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake Shoe-Chucker 2 <georgewk10@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-13 14:27 -0700
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-13 16:30 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-13 14:43 -0700
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-13 16:58 -0500
Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-15 05:39 +0200
2 Topaz stop right there (was: Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 06:17 -0500
Re: 2 Topaz stop right there (was: Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-23 10:06 -0500
Re: 2 Topaz stop right there (was: Re: 9/11 - Ten reasons why the hijackers were fake) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-08-23 10:26 -0500
Re: 2 Topaz stop right there Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-23 18:03 +0100
csiph-web