Chinese "Demolition" Proves 9-11 was an Inside Job
in [Physics]
|
Prev: FR Bending of Light = GR 1919 Eddington Experiment
Next: Solutions manual to Intermediate Accounting 13e Kieso
From: knews4u2chew on 13 Jan 2010 14:39 On Jan 12, 10:07 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jan 12, 6:36 pm, DanB <a...(a)some.net> wrote: > > > Peter Webb wrote: > > > Perhaps you can outline your alternate theory of what happened on 9/11, > > > which explains all this? > > > Why do you keep asking for this? > > He wants the kook to answer. Knowsknothing is of course refusing > because he has nothing. Peter is highlighting the FACT that 9/11 > twoofers don't really have any actual reasonable explanation for what > happened aside from the proven official findings. He's just like Loonrod. He refuses to read. But then Loonrod is a pathological liar. But then says Loonrod "it's impossible." Then Loonrod lies and says "It' debunked" yet provides not one cite for anything. Loonrod thinks just by typing in the words makes it so. http://www.google.com/search?q=david+ray+griffin&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
From: Iarnrod on 13 Jan 2010 17:07 On Jan 13, 12:39 pm, knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On Jan 12, 10:07 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 12, 6:36 pm, DanB <a...(a)some.net> wrote: > > > > Peter Webb wrote: > > > > Perhaps you can outline your alternate theory of what happened on 9/11, > > > > which explains all this? > > > > Why do you keep asking for this? > > > He wants the kook to answer. Knowsknothing is of course refusing > > because he has nothing. Peter is highlighting the FACT that 9/11 > > twoofers don't really have any actual reasonable explanation for what > > happened aside from the proven official findings. > > He's just like Loonrod. > He refuses to read. > But then Loonrod is a pathological liar. NAME ONE THING THEN, you fuckin' proven liar. You can't and you won't. > But then says Loonrod "it's impossible." Indeed, it is. Explosives make noise. You propose explosives that are silent and invisible. Thermite burns; you propose gravity-defying thermite that burns sideways and does stuff that thermite is physically incapable of doing. > Then Loonrod lies and says "It' debunked" yet provides not one cite > for anything. I always cite for everything. YOU never cite to actual facts. You only cite to other kookpages making unsupported assertions. > Loonrod thinks just by typing in the words makes it so. Not at all. The fact that I am proven correct on everything I have said makes it so.
From: Peter Webb on 13 Jan 2010 19:59 <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:7ab8427a-eed5-44c0-b2b9-31e6c4eb865e(a)p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... On Jan 12, 10:07 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jan 12, 6:36 pm, DanB <a...(a)some.net> wrote: > > > Peter Webb wrote: > > > Perhaps you can outline your alternate theory of what happened on > > > 9/11, > > > which explains all this? > > > Why do you keep asking for this? > > He wants the kook to answer. Knowsknothing is of course refusing > because he has nothing. Peter is highlighting the FACT that 9/11 > twoofers don't really have any actual reasonable explanation for what > happened aside from the proven official findings. He's just like Loonrod. He refuses to read. But then Loonrod is a pathological liar. But then says Loonrod "it's impossible." Then Loonrod lies and says "It' debunked" yet provides not one cite for anything. Loonrod thinks just by typing in the words makes it so. http://www.google.com/search?q=david+ray+griffin&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a ______________________________ If you have a better explanation for the events of 9/11, why don't you tell us what is it? What's the big secret?
From: knews4u2chew on 13 Jan 2010 20:14 On Jan 13, 4:59 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:7ab8427a-eed5-44c0-b2b9-31e6c4eb865e(a)p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 12, 10:07 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 12, 6:36 pm, DanB <a...(a)some.net> wrote: > > > > Peter Webb wrote: > > > > Perhaps you can outline your alternate theory of what happened on > > > > 9/11, > > > > which explains all this? > > > > Why do you keep asking for this? > > > He wants the kook to answer. Knowsknothing is of course refusing > > because he has nothing. Peter is highlighting the FACT that 9/11 > > twoofers don't really have any actual reasonable explanation for what > > happened aside from the proven official findings. > > He's just like Loonrod. > He refuses to read. > But then Loonrod is a pathological liar. > But then says Loonrod "it's impossible." > Then Loonrod lies and says "It' debunked" yet provides not one cite > for anything. > Loonrod thinks just by typing in the words makes it so.http://www.google.com/search?q=david+ray+griffin&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq... > > ______________________________ > If you have a better explanation for the events of 9/11, why don't you tell > us what is it? What's the big secret? Which events? Be specific. The big picture of "the event" is called False Flag Operations. http://www.google.com/search?q=false+flag&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a The details of how and who will be debated (argued) for centuries. It has been more than 45 years since the murder of JFK by corrupt government insiders and we a still discerning the true who and hows. What makes you think this will take any less time? You think "anyone" who had anything to do with this world wide fraud is going to just step up and say, "I helped spray nano-thermite on the floor connections in between the ceilings at the WTC?" It would be reported about as much as some guy claiming to be Jesus at his second "coming."
From: Peter Webb on 13 Jan 2010 23:51
<knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:b583dffe-7601-45b5-ac86-e69a0cd0dcd4(a)j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com... On Jan 13, 4:59 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:7ab8427a-eed5-44c0-b2b9-31e6c4eb865e(a)p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 12, 10:07 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 12, 6:36 pm, DanB <a...(a)some.net> wrote: > > > > Peter Webb wrote: > > > > Perhaps you can outline your alternate theory of what happened on > > > > 9/11, > > > > which explains all this? > > > > Why do you keep asking for this? > > > He wants the kook to answer. Knowsknothing is of course refusing > > because he has nothing. Peter is highlighting the FACT that 9/11 > > twoofers don't really have any actual reasonable explanation for what > > happened aside from the proven official findings. > > He's just like Loonrod. > He refuses to read. > But then Loonrod is a pathological liar. > But then says Loonrod "it's impossible." > Then Loonrod lies and says "It' debunked" yet provides not one cite > for anything. > Loonrod thinks just by typing in the words makes it > so.http://www.google.com/search?q=david+ray+griffin&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq... > > ______________________________ > If you have a better explanation for the events of 9/11, why don't you > tell > us what is it? What's the big secret? Which events? Be specific. _____________________________ I would have thought that most people would have some idea of what I meant by the "events of 9/11". If you have forgotten, they included the destruction of the world trade centre buildings, the attack on the Pentagon, and the apparent attempted hijacking of an aircraft which subsequently crashed on that day in Pennsylvania. Other things happened that day as well, and you can explain them if you like, but these are the events to which I was refering. So, lets hear your explanation ... |