On Jun 1, 7:29*pm, corneal pye c...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM, Iarnrod wrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d...

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Have you saw this ?She lost her life for telling the truth!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Unych...layer_embedded

On 11-06-01 08:42 PM, Iarnrod wrote:
On Jun 1, 5:29 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d...

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Yes, all obviously were wrong.

But were they, to quote your claim, "Moron twoofers"?

You can't argue with FACTS, even though
that's what you moron twoofers do day in and day out.

Those are factual cites of expert opinion of the day.

SPECULATION by people does not constitute FACT, idiot.

No such claim has been made,

All that has occurred is that evidence of credible experts opining
regarding bin Laden's status was disseminated through the mainstream media.

Let's return now to your claim, that "Moron twoofers" were "running
around" and feeding some kind of "echo chamber".

The real world tote shows we have:

1. The FBI's counter-terrorism chief.

2. A former US intelligence officer and BU profesor.

3. The foremost bin Laden exert and a Duke professor.

4. A political analyst and a philosophy professor.

Somehow, even in your fevered mind, I doubt you can truly make the case
that these sources are all:

a. "Morons"

b. "Twoofers"

But feel free to sacrifice your own meager credibility upon your
self-made alter of rank egoism, as is your regular wont here.

And understand that there are several other government spokespersons who
claimed the bin Laden tapes to be fake and opined as well that he was
deceased.

--

"corneal pye" wrote in message
...
On 11-06-01 08:42 PM, Iarnrod wrote:
On Jun 1, 5:29 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d...

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the
West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Yes, all obviously were wrong.

But were they, to quote your claim, "Moron twoofers"?

You can't argue with FACTS, even though
that's what you moron twoofers do day in and day out.

Those are factual cites of expert opinion of the day.

SPECULATION by people does not constitute FACT, idiot.

No such claim has been made,

All that has occurred is that evidence of credible experts opining
regarding bin Laden's status was disseminated through the mainstream
media.

Let's return now to your claim, that "Moron twoofers" were "running
around" and feeding some kind of "echo chamber".

The real world tote shows we have:

1. The FBI's counter-terrorism chief.

2. A former US intelligence officer and BU profesor.

3. The foremost bin Laden exert and a Duke professor.

4. A political analyst and a philosophy professor.

Yep, and absolutely NONE of them stated that Osama was positively,
absolutely and conclusively dead. They all included wiggle words, such as
appears, or seems, or based on the evidence, etc. In short NONE of them
stated he was factually DEAD.

Further, most of them seemed to be expressing their OPINION of his status
rather than any factual knowledge that they absolutely knew he was dead.

Really, until you can separate opinion from fact, and not overlook the
wiggle words that turns a statement into something non-conclusive or
binding, you're never going to be able to separate out what is actually
factual from mere assertions.

On Jun 1, 11:05*pm, corneal pye c...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:42 PM,Iarnrodwrote:



On Jun 1, 5:29 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid *wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d....

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Yes, all obviously were wrong.

But were they, to quote your claim, *"Moron twoofers"?

So it would seem, dip****, since UBL was alive and well. Don't you
feel stupid even bringing it up?

Hint: You have nothing. You keep citing people's OPINIONS as FACTS. Do
you normally have such trouble separating fiction from reality?
chuckle

On Jun 1, 9:15*am, Iarnrod wrote:
On May 31, 9:23*pm, joeturn wrote:





On May 31, 7:06*pm, RHF wrote:

On May 31, 10:53*am, RD Sandman wrote:

joeturn wrote :

On May 23, 7:46*pm, RD Sandman wrote:
joeturn wrote
innews:56dbdfd0-9478-4ffd-8f98-20a3
:

On May 23, 3:34*pm, RD Sandman
wrote:
John Smith wrote

:

On 5/22/2011 2:16 PM, joeturn wrote:
On May 22, 4:47 pm, *wrote:
On May 21, 4:37 pm, "Scout"

*wrote:
*wrote in message

ups .c
om...
On May 20, 11:53 pm, *wrote:
On May 20, 8:53 pm, "Scout"
*wrote:
"John *wrote in message
...
On 5/20/2011 4:44 PM, Scout wrote:
"John *wrote in message
...
On 5/20/2011 3:34 PM, Scout wrote:
...
Evasion noted. Your inability to explain why we should
accept your claims over photographic evidence is
noted. Your denial of photographic
evidence is noted.
Seems all you can do is lie about the facts that don't
match your claims.
There is no evading your ignorance, it will remain
until you deal with
it ...
Nice to hear you admit you have a problem with ignorance
and that you
need to do something about it, but really you shouldn't
be talking to
yourself in public, makes people question your sanity
even further.
You simply need avail yourself of the experts. *All I
do is repeat the
facts, evidence and proof of the experts.
So let's see, by your own admission you are a parrot
that is so ignorant
that he can't look at a photo of a building in the
process of falling
outside of it's footprint and still can't determine his
experts might not
be the experts they claim and that you're stupid enough
to buy their Bull**** hook, line and sinker.
Ok, I accept you don't know what you're talking about by
your own admission.
Which means you're really not the right person to be
trying to talk about
this stuff then are you?
Maybe you should tell your experts to come here since
maybe they might
actually know what they're talking about rather than
simply mouthing the
claims of others that they don't understand, can't
support, and can't
even recognize as being clearly wrong?
So now that we've established you as an ignorant
mouthpiece by your own
admission, is there any further reason anyone should
listen to you for
even a second?
I think your post is more about you than me, why don't
you ask others if
they can see you for the worthless attack slob you are,
or they are fooled
into thinking you are offering valid debate, analysis,
facts, etc.?
IOW, you can't refute anything I have said about you.-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Scot is completely ignoring the missile attack on the
pentagram.
What missile attack, insane nut job?
Oh, that comes from the nutjob who posted his "expert"
analysis of the frames from the Pentagon surveillance video
showing the plane crashing into the side of the Pentagon..
Of course, what both this "expert" and joe failed to even
consider is that even on the video the SCALE of the image
would clearly preclude a missile given that it's at least 2
stories in height as compared to the 5 stories of the
Pentagon. But the voice over from the "expert" says it was a
missile, and that's good enough "proof" for Joe.
Which
way did it fall Scot after the missiles hit it?
When did missiles hit it?
I wasn't even aware the Pentagon fell over.
Three missiles are were
recorded in the same FBI release,
Show us, insnae nut job.
Yea, one "missile" per frame.snicker
Well the remnates of the first one is
just the solid rocket fuel plume after the hit,but you can
see the next two in motion!
Stop sniffing glue, WrongTurnJoe.
"It is too late for that"
Chun in Remo Williams.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But your plane still wont fit in that little red box it will
only contain an object no larger than 16 feet!

Everyone can see the missile in front of the solid rocket
plume!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
PS

I did not pay any attention to what the guy in the middle link
says I just saw the missile on my own look at it before the red
box is drawn!

Then in the top link you can see it over and over again,There
is no plane just a missile launched from withing the fenced in
constrution area.

What kind of military vehicle is that at mark 7:03 in the video
below a flatbed firetruck? I recall seeing it parked beside the
construction gererater dont you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjcoP...=player_embedd
ed

There is some reason the tape of what actually happened at the
pentacon has NOT been released, even yet, today ...

Yes, it has. *There are videos, tours of the damage, stories from
th
e
survivors......what else do you want?

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I too am a survivor of 911 I was not there at the time like most
government paid stooges.But I can tell you the cartoon they put on
for the TV audience was nothing like realy being there! The area
was roped off and most of the props were put into the staged area
before the hologramed air craft *was projected!

They even put the JT8MD engine on the sidewalk and covered it up
with a tarp so it would go unnoticed till after the hologram!

Wow!! *Now I know where those berries disappeared to. Did you have
them with milk or simply eat them raw?

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They were not berrys RD they were coffee beans.They ground them up in
the cat **** soo they could charge you more for them. You gulped them
down with every sip and I'll bet you smilled and said eye instead of
saying this taste and smells exactly like cat ****!

You taste for **** is appaling,but to each his own!

- My taste for **** is so acute, I even post to you. *
-
- --
- Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)
-
- If you woke up this morning....
- Don't complain.

awaken,,, Awaken... AWAKEN ! ! !

? Obama-Regime Planing a False Flag Attack
on the Sears Towers in Chicago...http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...dfe518ff642d0b
*.
-read-
? Will There Be A New False Flag Attack
In Chicago's Sears Tower !
*Source* Gerald Celente whttp://www.opednews.com/Diary/Will-There-Be-A-New-False-by-Saman-Moha...
*.
*.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Instead of having the false flag in Chicago they simply killed Osama
again. This guy has miraculously(Spell Check **** #2 TIA)survived
three deaths so far?

No, ****wit. Please try to acquire a brain. You have an IQ registering
in the negative range.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Here is a pic of him before he under-went cosmetic sugery and became
president.

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/h...07/09/suit.jpg

Here is the Islamic community denying his existance!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UGXV...layer_embedded

Lamerod your easy!

On Jun 3, 5:10*am, joeturn wrote:
On Jun 1, wrote:

On May 31, 9:23*pm, joeturn wrote:

On May 31, 7:06*pm, RHF wrote:

On May 31, 10:53*am, RD Sandman wrote:

joeturn wrote :

On May 23, 7:46*pm, RD Sandman wrote:
joeturn wrote
innews:56dbdfd0-9478-4ffd-8f98-20a3
:

On May 23, 3:34*pm, RD Sandman
wrote:
John Smith wrote

:

On 5/22/2011 2:16 PM, joeturn wrote:
On May 22, 4:47 pm, *wrote:
On May 21, 4:37 pm, "Scout"

*wrote:
*wrote in message

ups .c
om...
On May 20, 11:53 pm, *wrote:
On May 20, 8:53 pm, "Scout"
*wrote:
"John *wrote in message
...
On 5/20/2011 4:44 PM, Scout wrote:
"John *wrote in message
...
On 5/20/2011 3:34 PM, Scout wrote:
...
Evasion noted. Your inability to explain why we should
accept your claims over photographic evidence is
noted. Your denial of photographic
evidence is noted.
Seems all you can do is lie about the facts that don't
match your claims.
There is no evading your ignorance, it will remain
until you deal with
it ...
Nice to hear you admit you have a problem with ignorance
and that you
need to do something about it, but really you shouldn't
be talking to
yourself in public, makes people question your sanity
even further.
You simply need avail yourself of the experts. *All I
do is repeat the
facts, evidence and proof of the experts.
So let's see, by your own admission you are a parrot
that is so ignorant
that he can't look at a photo of a building in the
process of falling
outside of it's footprint and still can't determine his
experts might not
be the experts they claim and that you're stupid enough
to buy their Bull**** hook, line and sinker.
Ok, I accept you don't know what you're talking about by
your own admission.
Which means you're really not the right person to be
trying to talk about
this stuff then are you?
Maybe you should tell your experts to come here since
maybe they might
actually know what they're talking about rather than
simply mouthing the
claims of others that they don't understand, can't
support, and can't
even recognize as being clearly wrong?
So now that we've established you as an ignorant
mouthpiece by your own
admission, is there any further reason anyone should
listen to you for
even a second?
I think your post is more about you than me, why don't
you ask others if
they can see you for the worthless attack slob you are,
or they are fooled
into thinking you are offering valid debate, analysis,
facts, etc.?
IOW, you can't refute anything I have said about you.-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Scot is completely ignoring the missile attack on the
pentagram.
What missile attack, insane nut job?
Oh, that comes from the nutjob who posted his "expert"
analysis of the frames from the Pentagon surveillance video
showing the plane crashing into the side of the Pentagon.
Of course, what both this "expert" and joe failed to even
consider is that even on the video the SCALE of the image
would clearly preclude a missile given that it's at least 2
stories in height as compared to the 5 stories of the
Pentagon. But the voice over from the "expert" says it was a
missile, and that's good enough "proof" for Joe.
Which
way did it fall Scot after the missiles hit it?
When did missiles hit it?
I wasn't even aware the Pentagon fell over.
Three missiles are were
recorded in the same FBI release,
Show us, insnae nut job.
Yea, one "missile" per frame.snicker
Well the remnates of the first one is
just the solid rocket fuel plume after the hit,but you can
see the next two in motion!
Stop sniffing glue, WrongTurnJoe.
"It is too late for that"
Chun in Remo Williams.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But your plane still wont fit in that little red box it will
only contain an object no larger than 16 feet!

Everyone can see the missile in front of the solid rocket
plume!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
PS

I did not pay any attention to what the guy in the middle link
says I just saw the missile on my own look at it before the red
box is drawn!

Then in the top link you can see it over and over again,There
is no plane just a missile launched from withing the fenced in
constrution area.

What kind of military vehicle is that at mark 7:03 in the video
below a flatbed firetruck? I recall seeing it parked beside the
construction gererater dont you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjcoP...=player_embedd
ed

There is some reason the tape of what actually happened at the
pentacon has NOT been released, even yet, today ...

Yes, it has. *There are videos, tours of the damage, stories from
th
e
survivors......what else do you want?

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I too am a survivor of 911 I was not there at the time like most
government paid stooges.But I can tell you the cartoon they put on
for the TV audience was nothing like realy being there! The area
was roped off and most of the props were put into the staged area
before the hologramed air craft *was projected!

They even put the JT8MD engine on the sidewalk and covered it up
with a tarp so it would go unnoticed till after the hologram!

Wow!! *Now I know where those berries disappeared to. Did you have
them with milk or simply eat them raw?

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They were not berrys RD they were coffee beans.They ground them up in
the cat **** soo they could charge you more for them. You gulped them
down with every sip and I'll bet you smilled and said eye instead of
saying this taste and smells exactly like cat ****!

You taste for **** is appaling,but to each his own!

- My taste for **** is so acute, I even post to you. *
-
- --
- Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)
-
- If you woke up this morning....
- Don't complain.

awaken,,, Awaken... AWAKEN ! ! !

? Obama-Regime Planing a False Flag Attack
on the Sears Towers in Chicago...http://groups.google.com/group/rec.....dfe518ff642d0b
*.
-read-
? Will There Be A New False Flag Attack
In Chicago's Sears Tower !
*Source* Gerald Celente whttp://www.opednews.com/Diary/Will-There-Be-A-New-False-by-Saman-Moha...
*.
*.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Instead of having the false flag in Chicago they simply killed Osama
again. This guy has miraculously(Spell Check **** #2 TIA)survived
three deaths so far?

No, ****wit. Please try to acquire a brain. You have an IQ registering
in the negative range.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Here is a pic of him before he under-went cosmetic sugery and became
president.

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/h...tent/uploads/2...

Here is the Islamic community denying his existance!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UGXV...layer_embedded

Lamerod your easy!

WrongTurnJoe, please put down the crack pipe and go into detox. You're
amazing, as far as comedy gold goes, but we're all starting to really
worry about you.

On Jun 3, 10:04*am, corneal pye c...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-02 11:28 PM,Iarnrodwrote:



On Jun 1, 11:05 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid *wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:42 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On Jun 1, 5:29 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid * *wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d....

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Yes, all obviously were wrong.

But were they, to quote your claim, *"Moron twoofers"?

So it would seem, dip****, since UBL was alive and well.

Oh, so they have all published additional material which qualifies as
911 "twoof"?

Care to CITE those publications?

Don't you
feel stupid even bringing it up?

Not really, I mean citing the FBI's own "counter-terrorism chief" isn't
exactly a weak resource, now is it?

Well...IS it?

Hint: You have nothing.

I have timely cites OF the day.

You have hindsight.

Hint - hindsight can NEVER rewrite history.

Cope.

You keep citing people's OPINIONS as FACTS.

The only "fact" I have stated is that THESE people are NOT "Moron twoofers".

Care to DISPUTE that?

Do you normally have such trouble separating fiction from reality?

No, that seems to be your dissonance.

chuckle

Time for you to put up or shut up, how many of these resources can you
quantify as "Moron twoofers"?

This is grand hilarity, enjoy turning on my rotisserie spit, you silly twit.

Sad and pathetic little protests of yours, drowning in the sea of
TRUTH.

Hint: You lose, and you lose big-time.

You have cited NOTHING except people expressing GUESSES and OPINIONS.

EPIC FAIL.

On 11-06-03 10:32 PM, Iarnrod wrote:
On Jun 3, 10:04 am, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-02 11:28 PM,Iarnrodwrote:



On Jun 1, 11:05 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:42 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On Jun 1, 5:29 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d...

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Yes, all obviously were wrong.

But were they, to quote your claim, "Moron twoofers"?

So it would seem, dip****, since UBL was alive and well.

Oh, so they have all published additional material which qualifies as
911 "twoof"?

Care to CITE those publications?

Don't you
feel stupid even bringing it up?

Not really, I mean citing the FBI's own "counter-terrorism chief" isn't
exactly a weak resource, now is it?

Well...IS it?

Hint: You have nothing.

I have timely cites OF the day.

You have hindsight.

Hint - hindsight can NEVER rewrite history.

Cope.

You keep citing people's OPINIONS as FACTS.

The only "fact" I have stated is that THESE people are NOT "Moron twoofers".

Care to DISPUTE that?

Do you normally have such trouble separating fiction from reality?

No, that seems to be your dissonance.

chuckle

Time for you to put up or shut up, how many of these resources can you
quantify as "Moron twoofers"?

This is grand hilarity, enjoy turning on my rotisserie spit, you silly twit.

Sad and pathetic little protests of yours, drowning in the sea of
TRUTH.

Nothing you would have bathed in...

Hint: You lose, and you lose big-time.

I do?!???

You have cited NOTHING except people expressing GUESSES and OPINIONS.

You called them "Moron twoofers".

Is that definitive applicable to the head of the FBI's own
counter-terrorism unit?

Eh?

Is it????

EPIC FAIL.

Yours, yes.
--

On Jun 4, 1:04*am, corneal pye c...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-03 10:32 PM,Iarnrodwrote:



On Jun 3, 10:04 am, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid *wrote:
On 11-06-02 11:28 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On Jun 1, 11:05 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid * *wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:42 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On Jun 1, 5:29 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid * * *wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d...

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Yes, all obviously were wrong.

But were they, to quote your claim, *"Moron twoofers"?

So it would seem, dip****, since UBL was alive and well.

Oh, so they have all published additional material which qualifies as
911 "twoof"?

Care to CITE those publications?

Don't you
feel stupid even bringing it up?

Not really, I mean citing the FBI's own "counter-terrorism chief" isn't
exactly a weak resource, now is it?

Well...IS it?

Hint: You have nothing.

I have timely cites OF the day.

You have hindsight.

Hint - hindsight can NEVER rewrite history.

Cope.

You keep citing people's OPINIONS as FACTS.

The only "fact" I have stated is that THESE people are NOT "Moron twoofers".

Care to DISPUTE that?

Do you normally have such trouble separating fiction from reality?

No, that seems to be your dissonance.

chuckle

Time for you to put up or shut up, how many of these resources can you
quantify as "Moron twoofers"?

This is grand hilarity, enjoy turning on my rotisserie spit, you silly twit.

Sad and pathetic little protests of yours, drowning in the sea of
TRUTH.

Nothing you would have bathed in...

The FACT that I have proven all my claims and debunked yours sort of
makes you look like a silly little boy here, kooker. you're circling
the drain.

Hint: You lose, and you lose big-time.

I do?!???

Well, uh, yeah.

You have cited NOTHING except people expressing GUESSES and OPINIONS.

You called them "Moron twoofers".

As they are if they claimed UBL was already dead.. Obviously, he was
not.

Is that definitive applicable to the head of the FBI's own
counter-terrorism unit?

Eh?

Is it????

He did not claim UBL was dead, fuzznuts.

EPIC FAIL.

Yours, yes.

Nope, yours. Not in dispute.

The fact that we killed UBL last month sorta means you're an idiot and
he was not dead before that.

On 11-06-04 07:24 PM, Iarnrod wrote:
On Jun 4, 1:04 am, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-03 10:32 PM,Iarnrodwrote:



On Jun 3, 10:04 am, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-02 11:28 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On Jun 1, 11:05 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:42 PM,Iarnrodwrote:

On Jun 1, 5:29 pm, corneal pyec...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Address.invalid wrote:
On 11-06-01 08:16 AM,Iarnrodwrote:

On May 31, 10:57 pm, wrote:

Wrong . He was claimed to be dead FOUR times before the heavily
publicized 2011 'death' ...

No he wasn't. Moron twoofers running around the past few years
claiming UBL was dead doesn't actually constitute a legitimate claim.
It's just your own echo chamber rattling back your insanities at you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2135473.stm

Thursday, 18 July, 2002, 09:15 GMT 10:15 UK
Bin Laden 'probably' dead

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation's counter-terrorism chief, Dale
Watson, says he thinks Osama bin Laden is "probably" dead.

(Moron twoofer?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ma-Bin-Laden-d...

The theory first received an airing in the American Spectator magazine
earlier this year when former U.S. foreign intelligence officer and
senior editor Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor of international
relations at Boston University, stated bluntly: 'All the evidence
suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.'

(Moron twoofer?)

There are other doubters, too. Professor Bruce Lawrence, head of Duke
University's religious studies' department and the foremost Bin Laden
expert, argues that the increasingly secular language in the video and
audio tapes of Osama (his earliest ones are littered with references to
God and the Prophet Mohammed) are inconsistent with his strict Islamic
religion, Wahhabism.

(Moron twoofer?)

This week, still more questions have been raised with the publication in
America and Britain of a book called Osama Bin Laden: Dead or Alive?

Written by political analyst and philosopher Professor David Ray
Griffin, former emeritus professor at California's Claremont School of
Theology, it is provoking shock waves - for it goes into far more detail
about his supposed death and suggests there has been a cover-up by the West.

The book claims that Bin Laden died of kidney failure, or a linked
complaint, on December 13, 2001, while living in Afghanistan's Tora Bora
mountains close to the border with Waziristan.

His burial took place within 24 hours, in line with Muslim religious
rules, and in an unmarked grave, which is a Wahhabi custom.

(Moron twoofer?)

--

Yes, all obviously were wrong.

But were they, to quote your claim, "Moron twoofers"?

So it would seem, dip****, since UBL was alive and well.

Oh, so they have all published additional material which qualifies as
911 "twoof"?

Care to CITE those publications?

Don't you
feel stupid even bringing it up?

Not really, I mean citing the FBI's own "counter-terrorism chief" isn't
exactly a weak resource, now is it?

Well...IS it?

Hint: You have nothing.

I have timely cites OF the day.

You have hindsight.

Hint - hindsight can NEVER rewrite history.

Cope.

You keep citing people's OPINIONS as FACTS.

The only "fact" I have stated is that THESE people are NOT "Moron twoofers".

Care to DISPUTE that?

Do you normally have such trouble separating fiction from reality?

No, that seems to be your dissonance.

chuckle

Time for you to put up or shut up, how many of these resources can you
quantify as "Moron twoofers"?

This is grand hilarity, enjoy turning on my rotisserie spit, you silly twit.

Sad and pathetic little protests of yours, drowning in the sea of
TRUTH.

Nothing you would have bathed in...

The FACT that I have proven all my claims and debunked yours sort of
makes you look like a silly little boy here, kooker. you're circling
the drain.

Your claim was that all these people who said bin Laden was dead are
"Moron twoofers".

I state again, you have NOT proved that and even you are not foolish
enough to call the FBI's counter-terrorism chief a "Moron twoofer".

Game over.

Hint: You lose, and you lose big-time.

I do?!???

Well, uh, yeah.

Only in your delusions.

You have cited NOTHING except people expressing GUESSES and OPINIONS.

You called them "Moron twoofers".

As they are if they claimed UBL was already dead.. Obviously, he was
not.

So you are publicly stating that Dale Watson is a "Moron twoofer"?

Is that your FINAL answer?

I think you have no clue what constitutes a "twoofer".

Is that definitive applicable to the head of the FBI's own
counter-terrorism unit?

Eh?

Is it????

He did not claim UBL was dead, fuzznuts.

Ah so now the real squirming begins...he said he was "probably dead".

So we can say he was "probably" wrong.

But you will NEVER indict him as a "twoofer".

So stop trying.

EPIC FAIL.

Yours, yes.

Nope, yours. Not in dispute.

Sorry you made claims you can't prove, sad it troubles you so much you
can never admit it.

The fact that we killed UBL last month sorta means you're an idiot and
he was not dead before that.

The "fact" changes nothing in hindsight. At each stage of his tape
dissemination there have been credible governmental experts who claimed
that the tapes we

a. not him

b. composites

c. old recordings

And thereby questioned if he was still alive. The people who did this
were not "twoofers" they were defense analysts and that was there
considered expert opinion at THOSE times.

Nothing you can say here will rewrite history, so just quit acting like
a petulant child.
--