| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 6, 2:14*pm, Jah Wobble wrote:
John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. *The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. *The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. *Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! The explosives were built into all the towers during their construction! Listen to the architect's interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV1mB...layer_embedded |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
joeturn wrote:
On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah Wobble wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! The explosives were built into all the towers during their construction! Listen to the architect's interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV1mB...layer_embedded Well, then it's gotta be true....even though that flaky retard had nothing to do with it. |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On 8/05/2011 12:16 AM, joeturn wrote:
On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all Minor correction. jet aircraft do NOT use diesel fuel. They don't even use gasoline or avgas. What do they use? Humble old kerosene. Admittedly, it's power kerosene but it's still kerosene. the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! The explosives were built into all the towers during their construction! Listen to the architect's interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV1mB...layer_embedded These jerks on the video look like they're trippin'. Actually, from your comments, I'd say you're doing a bit of trippin' too! Krypsis |
How do you expect bin ladens' death to affect your personal life,income, quality of living, etc.?
On 5/7/2011 8:17 AM, Krypsis wrote:
... Minor correction. jet aircraft do NOT use diesel fuel. They don't even use gasoline or avgas. What do they use? Humble old kerosene. Admittedly, it's power kerosene but it's still kerosene. ... For all intents and purposes: kerosene = No. 1 Diesel = Jet Fuel There are minor differences, as an example: http://www.combinedoil.com/pdf/MAP_N...20Kerosene.pdf My grandfather used to use No. 1 Diesel in kerosene lamps and kerosene heaters for barns and smudge pots to keep plants in the fields from freezing ... in the home he only used kerosene, said it was because it was "deodorized No. 1 Diesel." Now-a-days? Who knows ... Regards, JS |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
Krypsis wrote:
On 8/05/2011 12:16 AM, joeturn wrote: On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all Minor correction. jet aircraft do NOT use diesel fuel. They don't even use gasoline or avgas. What do they use? Humble old kerosene. Admittedly, it's power kerosene but it's still kerosene. the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! The explosives were built into all the towers during their construction! Listen to the architect's interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV1mB...layer_embedded These jerks on the video look like they're trippin'. Actually, from your comments, I'd say you're doing a bit of trippin' too! It was supposed to be funny....and by golly, it was! |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 11:17*am, Krypsis wrote:
On 8/05/2011 12:16 AM, joeturn wrote: On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah *wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k *idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. *The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. *The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. *Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all Minor correction. jet aircraft do NOT use diesel fuel. They don't even use gasoline or avgas. What do they use? Humble old kerosene. Admittedly, it's power kerosene but it's still kerosene. the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! The explosives were built into all the towers during their construction! Listen to the architect's interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV1mB...layer_embedded These jerks on the video look like they're trippin'. Actually, from your comments, I'd say you're doing a bit of trippin' too! Krypsis- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Please explain how my comments makes you think of tripping.How often do you do this? Is it a problem or have you not sold your soul yet to support your habbit? |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
"joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah Wobble wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! Really? Collapse into the building's footprint you say? http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...collapse2a.jpg I don't think so. Once you have any idea of the facts, then maybe you can try again. |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 8:43*pm, "Scout"
wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah Wobble wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. *The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. *The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. *Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! Really? Collapse into the building's footprint you say? http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...collapse2a.jpg I don't think so. Once you have any idea of the facts, then maybe you can try again.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well just think they were put in the buildings in 1963 it a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out on them! |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 8:43*pm, "Scout"
wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah Wobble wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. *The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. *The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. *Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! Really? Collapse into the building's footprint you say? http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...collapse2a.jpg I don't think so. Once you have any idea of the facts, then maybe you can try again.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well just think they were put in the buildings in 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out of all them! |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 8:43*pm, "Scout"
wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah Wobble wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. *The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. *The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. *Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! Really? Collapse into the building's footprint you say? http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...collapse2a.jpg I don't think so. Once you have any idea of the facts, then maybe you can try again.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction prior to 1968 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out of all them! |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 8:43*pm, "Scout"
wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah Wobble wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. *The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. *The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. *Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! Really? Collapse into the building's footprint you say? http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...collapse2a.jpg I don't think so. Once you have any idea of the facts, then maybe you can try again.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out of all them! |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 8:43*pm, "Scout"
wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 6, 2:14 pm, Jah Wobble wrote: John Smith wrote: On 5/6/2011 10:17 AM, Jah Wobble wrote: * US * wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT), harry k idiotically wrote: The usual descriptions of sights and sounds of any building undergoing a collapse When demolished ... That's what happens when very large airliners filled with fuel crashes into them at 500 Kts, you retard. They get demolished. The aircraft didn't cause the fall. *The plane hit the building, the buildings stood. *The fuel was splashed about, burnt off in ~15 mins. and the buildings stood. *Once the fuel was burnt off, all you were left with was a "normal" high-rise fire. Right.. and NOTHING in the building was flamable and the sprinklers were in perfect working order. You retard. I wonder who placed the demolitions in the building so precise and so undercover, that the THOUSANDS of people that work there 24/7, never saw anything going on. Any idear, you retard? Burnt off in 15 minutes! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One plane load of diesel fuel could not have been enough to get all the verticle support columns to give away simultaneously through out the buildi to create a verticl collapse in the buildings footprints! Really? Collapse into the building's footprint you say? http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...collapse2a.jpg I don't think so. Once you have any idea of the facts, then maybe you can try again.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 10:43*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 5/7/2011 7:20 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in 1963 it a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out on them! Hey, DUDE! That is spelled dud (duds), no offense meant ... but, a bunch of dudes hanging around in the walls, since 1963, would make for an interesting discussion also ... *:-) Regards, JS When did jimmy hoffa come up missing? |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On 5/7/2011 7:50 PM, joeturn wrote:
On May 7, 10:43 pm, John wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:20 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in 1963 it a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out on them! Hey, DUDE! That is spelled dud (duds), no offense meant ... but, a bunch of dudes hanging around in the walls, since 1963, would make for an interesting discussion also ... :-) Regards, JS When did jimmy hoffa come up missing? The union president of the Teamsters who they dissolved in sulfuric acid and flushed down a drain? " ... disappeared at, or sometime after, 2:45 pm on July 30, 1975, ..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Hoffa Regards, JS |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote:
... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenants http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p1.html Part Two - Security http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p2.html Part Three - Convergence http://911review.com/articles/ryan/c...lliburton.html Part Four - Cleanup http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p4.html Regards, JS |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
|
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 9:14*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade No they weren't. FACT. In any case, no explosives went off. FACT. Your theory is utter disproven 100% bull****, disproven on its face. |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
http://www.devilfinder.com/find.php?...ory+Crum bles
Let those MOFOS SCRAMBLE! There isn't Any damn thing they (''they'', Ministry of Propaganda) can say that will 'Take'. Damage Control! AFVN (Armed Forces Vietnam Network) Weather Girl. http://www.tsna.org cuhulin |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
On May 7, 11:14*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1..html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Just like the man says at 6:00 into this video ."He was there when it happened and I guess he ought to know" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV1mB...layer_embedded |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
"joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 7, 11:14 pm, John Smith wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Then clearly the building plans, contract documents, inspectors, and so on would know ALL about them, right? Interesting that absolutely NO ONE recalls such devices, no plans exist of their inclusion in the building, nor the fact that no other building build during this time has been shown to include such devices in their construction. Really, you need to talk to someone, your mental health is seriously in doubt. |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
On 8/05/2011 6:24 PM, Scout wrote:
"joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 7, 11:14 pm, John Smith wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Then clearly the building plans, contract documents, inspectors, and so on would know ALL about them, right? Interesting that absolutely NO ONE recalls such devices, no plans exist of their inclusion in the building, nor the fact that no other building build during this time has been shown to include such devices in their construction. Really, you need to talk to someone, your mental health is seriously in doubt. Well, the reality is that his mental health or, more correctly, his lack of mental health has never been in doubt. His scribblings are quite effective in removing all doubt Krypsis |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On 5/7/2011 10:20 PM, joeturn wrote:
Well just think they were put in the buildings in 1963 it a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out on them! "gavanic"? Do you mean "galvanic"? "Dudes"? Do you mean "duds"? Sorry dude, your [lack of] education is showing. |
Malloy is right, Bush is no different from Osama
On 05/08/2011 02:17 AM, RHF wrote:
The 'Liberal' Radio Talk Show Host "Mike Malloy" Called for the US Navy Seals to "Take Bush Out" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ge_bu sh.html If we can use Navy SEALs to execute one guy for war crimes, why not another? |
Malloy is right, Bush is no different from Osama
dave wrote: On 05/08/2011 02:17 AM, RHF wrote: The 'Liberal' Radio Talk Show Host "Mike Malloy" Called for the US Navy Seals to "Take Bush Out" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ge_bu sh.html If we can use Navy SEALs to execute one guy for war crimes, why not another? Do ya think your pal Obama should be afraid? After all, he sure looked scared in that Situation Room photo. He was the smallest guy in the room and even Hillary was bigger than that runt. |
Malloy is right, Bush is no different from Osama
It is all so 'Fuzzy',,, Fuzzy St.John (old Cowboy movie actor) would
say, What the Hell!?! cuhulin |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 8, 6:08*am, * US * wrote:
On Sat, 07 May 2011 20:14:10 -0700, John Smith wrote: They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenants http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p1.html Part Two - Security http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p2.html Part Three - Convergence http://911review.com/articles/ryan/c...ic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanup http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p4.html Regards, JS Excellent presentation of facts. Not one contradictory fact has been presented. Not one SUPPORTING fact has been presented, you Bush-loving defender of the right. |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
On May 8, 4:24*am, "Scout"
wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 7, 11:14 pm, John Smith wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Then clearly the building plans, contract documents, inspectors, and so on would know ALL about them, right? Lofferley did not know and he was involved. Interesting that absolutely NO ONE recalls such devices, no plans exist of their inclusion in the building, nor the fact that no other building build during this time has been shown to include such devices in their construction. People would think the built in explosives could accidentally be set off and would not go into an astablishment loaded with preset demolictions .Would you? Really, you need to talk to someone, your mental health is seriously in doubt This type of projected thoiught is part of your programming,you have been brainwashed by your controling elite you are a mear slave that they take humor in watching try to explain away reality ..- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 8, 9:05*am, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 5/7/2011 10:20 PM, joeturn wrote: Well just think they were put in the buildings in 1963 it a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made dudes out on them! "gavanic"? Do you mean "galvanic"? "Dudes"? Do you mean "duds"? Sorry dude, your [lack of] education is showing. Schools only teach people a specific path to follow and that path is directed by the CIA/illuminati.Schools teach its pupils to have grammer hang-ups and instead of understanding what is being said they are programed to look for edicate.This type of programming has been successful for the controling elite for ages. |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
|
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
"joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 8, 4:24 am, "Scout" wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 7, 11:14 pm, John Smith wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Then clearly the building plans, contract documents, inspectors, and so on would know ALL about them, right? Lofferley did not know and he was involved. Then it wasn't part of the design. QED. |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
Looka here ilk,
http://www.devilfinder.com/find.php?...+East+Hostages Does that sort of kind of Ring a Bell? It's like this, sort of kind of, They (''They'') save the Bogeyman for whatever other U.S.(Keep in mind, SCARHEAD MOFO USURPER! is NOT! the President of U.S.A. U.S.A.does NOT! have a President!) prezes.Do you follow me? Do you understand what I am getting at? cuhulin |
Malloy is right, Bush is no different from Osama
On 05/08/2011 03:54 PM, RHF wrote:
On May 8, 6:31 am, wrote: On 05/08/2011 02:17 AM, RHF wrote: - - The 'Liberal' Radio Talk Show Host "Mike Malloy" - - Called for the US Navy Seals to "Take Bush Out" http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...29619837dd65e7 - If we can use Navy SEALs to execute one guy for war crimes, why not another? Dave, Dave, Dave : Once Again You Prove That You Are NO Libertarian of any Stripe -but- an Intolerant Elitist* With Liberal-Fascist Tendencies to Send-Out Death Squads To Kill Americans and America's Leaders Libertarians don't believe in pre-emptive war. We are way less likely to be swept up in some media frenzied orgasm of patriotism and revenge. We know that nothing changes until I the individual change. |
Malloy is right, Bush is no different from Osama
|
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
"Scout" wrote in message "joeturn" wrote in message .. .. On May 8, 4:24 am, "Scout" wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message . ... On May 7, 11:14 pm, John Smith wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_ha lliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Then clearly the building plans, contract documents, inspectors, and so on would know ALL about them, right? Lofferley did not know and he was involved. Then it wasn't part of the design. QED. If anything was put in anywhere for Bush.. It was during the period when cousin Marvin Bush was director of security for the WTC - just months before its collapse. |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
On May 8, 3:13*pm, "Scout"
wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message ... On May 8, 4:24 am, "Scout" wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message .... On May 7, 11:14 pm, John Smith wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Then clearly the building plans, contract documents, inspectors, and so on would know ALL about them, right? Lofferley did not know and he was involved. Then it wasn't part of the design. QED.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It was part of somebodys design since they were installed and Lofferty was asked where to put them! |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
I takes my sweaty nasty stinking socks off, I drapes them on doggy's
head. Pheeeeeeeeuuuu,,, doggy says.WMD! cuhulin |
The 'Liberal' Radio Talk Show Host Mike Malloy Called for the USNavy Seals to "Take Bush Out" !
Bush invaded and holocausted a nation that never did anything to us
and nothing has been done to him!!! |
Why wasn't George Bush captured and tried for 911?
"Uno Hu" wrote in message ... "Scout" wrote in message "joeturn" wrote in message .. . On May 8, 4:24 am, "Scout" wrote: "joeturn" wrote in message . .. On May 7, 11:14 pm, John Smith wrote: On 5/7/2011 7:46 PM, joeturn wrote: ... Well just think they were put in the buildings in durring their construction from 1966 through 1973 it's a wonder they all followed sequence the gavanic corrosion could have made duds out of all them! Thanks to John Smith the spell checker! DUDE! They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenantshttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html Part Two - Securityhttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html Part Three - Convergencehttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_ha lliburton... Part Four - Cleanuphttp://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html Regards, JS No they were put in during construction for quick removal,maybe the detonaters were conected during that time! Then clearly the building plans, contract documents, inspectors, and so on would know ALL about them, right? Lofferley did not know and he was involved. Then it wasn't part of the design. QED. If anything was put in anywhere for Bush.. It was during the period when cousin Marvin Bush was director of security for the WTC - just months before its collapse. Right, and as director he could naturally violate the terms of the contractual security without anyone noticing, or even employees coming forward later saying "Hey my boss ordered me to look the other way while all these guys with pallets of explosives came into the building". Sorry, but that's not going to hold water. |
Why wasn't Bin Laden captured and tried for 911?
On May 8, 2:44*pm, * US * wrote:
On Sat, 07 May 2011 20:14:10 -0700, John Smith wrote: They were dropped in during the computer/network upgrade ... security was lax, varoious employees remarked on this ... Part One - Tenants http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p1.html Part Two - Security http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p2.html Part Three - Convergence http://911review.com/articles/ryan/c...ic_halliburton... Part Four - Cleanup http://911review.com/articles/ryan/d...access_p4.html Regards, JS Excellent presentation of ... .... bull****. Not one contradictory fact has been presented. Not one supporting fact has been presented. In fact, all the science, evidence, videos, witnesses, etc., contradict your claims. This is not even remotely open to dispute. The bushkultie has no facts. That is correct. YOU, the bushkultie, have no facts. Bush is not getting his money's worth paying for your counter-disinfo shilling. You simply have not presented anything even remotely physically possible. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:33 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com